COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2022 Rule of Law Report Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 2022 Rule of Law Report The rule of law situation in the European Union
Date: 2022-07-13
Institutions: European Commission, Secretariat-General
Subjects: Italy, coronavirus disease, corruption, democracy, epidemic, independence of the judiciary, infringement of EU law, pluralism in the media, political rights, rule of law

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Luxembourg, 13.7.2022  SWD(2022) 512 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2022 Rule of Law Report        Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 2022 Rule of Law Report          The rule of law situation in the European Union {COM(2022) 500 final} - {SWD(2022) 501 final} - {SWD(2022) 502 final} - {SWD(2022) 503 final} - {SWD(2022) 504 final} - {SWD(2022) 505 final} - {SWD(2022) 506 final} - {SWD(2022) 507 final} - {SWD(2022) 508 final} - {SWD(2022) 509 final} - {SWD(2022) 510 final} - {SWD(2022) 511 final} - {SWD(2022) 513 final} - {SWD(2022) 514 final} - {SWD(2022) 515 final} - {SWD(2022) 516 final} - {SWD(2022) 517 final} - {SWD(2022) 518 final} - {SWD(2022) 519 final} - {SWD(2022) 520 final} - {SWD(2022) 521 final} - {SWD(2022) 522 final} - {SWD(2022) 523 final} - {SWD(2022) 524 final} - {SWD(2022) 525 final} - {SWD(2022) 526 final} - {SWD(2022) 527 final}  
 
 
ABSTRACT 

Comprehensive long-awaited civil and criminal justice reforms have been adopted as part of 
the  commitments  of  the  Italian  Recovery  and  Resilience  Plan,  aiming  at  improving  the 
quality  and  efficiency  of  the  justice  system.  Digitalisation  of  the  justice  system  is  further 
progressing  at  civil  courts,  while  challenges  remain  at  criminal  courts  and  prosecution 
offices.  Specific  measures  aimed  at  supporting  judges  are  being  implemented.  These 
measures, coupled with  forthcoming implementing legislation, intend to  address the serious 
challenges  related  to  the  efficiency  of  the  justice  system,  including  backlogs  and  length  of 
proceedings.  On  16  June  2022,  the  Italian  Parliament  approved  a  new  law  to  reform  the 
justice system, which also includes provisions regarding the establishment and functioning of 
the High Council for the Judiciary. Implementing legislation, to be adopted within one year, 
will  provide  the  opportunity  to  adopt  more  detailed  provisions  that  take  into  account 
European standards on judicial independence, including on the organisational powers of the 
presidents  of  courts  and  the  involvement  of  lawyers  in  the  professional  evaluation  of 
magistrates. 

Italy’s  new  National  Anti-Corruption  Plan  (2022-2024)  is  planned  to  be  in  place  in  the 
summer 2022. While the criminal justice reform addresses the excessive delays in corruption 
prosecutions,  close  monitoring  will  be  required  to  ensure  that  corruption  cases  will  not  be 
automatically  closed  at  appeals  level.  Challenges  still  exist  for  corruption  investigators 
regarding  the  level  of  interconnection  of  the  registries  that  include  relevant  financial  data, 
which  calls  for  increased  digitalisation  and  artificial  intelligence  tools.  Several  legislative 
proposals  aimed  at  strengthening  corruption  prevention  are  still  pending,  including  on 
whistleblower  protection,  conflicts  of  interest  and  lobbying.  Political  party  and  campaign 
financing rules show some significant loopholes, while several investigations into cases were 
launched  and  first  instance  conviction  reached.  The  practice  of  channelling  donations  to 
political  parties  through  political  foundations  and  associations  present  a  serious  obstacle  to 
public  accountability,  as  transactions  are  difficult  to  trace  and  no  common,  single  register 
exists. Corruption is increasingly used to infiltrate the legal economy. 

Italy  has  a  robust  legislative  framework  regulating  the  media  sector,  including  its  public 
service media, as well as an independent and effective media regulator. Concerns persist with 
regard to the precarious working conditions of many journalists in the country, the protection 
of  journalistic  sources  and  the  issue  of  professional  secrecy.  While  prison  sentences  for 
defamation have largely been abolished following a landmark Constitutional Court ruling in 
2021,  the  increasing  prevalence  of  SLAPP  cases  and  the  combination  of  criminal  and  civil 
defamation raises concerns. In spite of a well-functioning and resourced coordination centre 
dedicated  to  monitoring  the  issue,  cases  of  physical  attacks  and  intimidation  against 
journalists and media outlets continue to rise year-on-year.  

The  Parliament  and  the  Constitutional  Court  have  continued  to  exercise  scrutiny  over 
restrictive  measures  taken  in  the  context  of  the COVID-19  pandemic,  while  the  emergency 
regime has recently ended. Due to delays in the legislative process, a National Human Rights 
Institution remains to be established. Democratic participation of civil society organisations 
would be promoted through a permanent  advisory board. However, the civic space remains 
narrow, in particular for the organisations dealing with migrants, and the registration process 
for non-governmental organisations remains complex.  

1 

 
 
 
RECOMMENDATIONS 

In addition  to  recalling  the commitments made under the national  Recovery and Resilience 
Plan relating to certain aspects of the justice system and the anti-corruption framework, it is 
recommended to Italy to: 

  Continue  the  efforts  to  further  improve  the  level  of  digitalisation  of  the  justice  system, 

particularly for criminal courts and prosecutors’ offices.   

  Continue  effective  operations  of  police  and  prosecution  service  against  high-level 

corruption, including by enhancing digitalisation and interconnection of registries. 

  Adopt  comprehensive  conflict  of  interests  rules  and  lobbying  regulation  to  establish  an 

operational lobbying register, including a legislative footprint. 

 

  Effectively  address  the  practice  of  channelling  donations  through  political  foundations 
and associations  and introduce single electronic register for party  and campaign finance 
information.  
Introduce  legislative  and  other  safeguards  to  reform  the  regime  on  defamation,  the 
protection  of  professional  secrecy  and  journalistic  sources,  taking  into  account  the 
European standards on the protection of journalists. 
Increase efforts to establish a National Human Rights Institution taking into account the 
UN Paris Principles 

 

2 

 
 
 
I. 

JUSTICE SYSTEM  

The  structure  of  the  justice  system  is  set  out  in  the  Constitution,  which  enshrines  its 
independence and autonomy. Ordinary courts have jurisdiction in civil and criminal matters 
and are organised in three instances. The first instance is composed of justices of the peace, 
ordinary courts and juvenile courts. The second and third instances are made up of the courts 
of appeal and the High Court of Cassation, respectively. Administrative justice is organised 
in  first  and  second  instance  courts.  Jurisdiction  in  accounting  matters  is  exercised  by  the 
Court  of  Auditors  (with  Regional  and  Central  Chambers).  Regarding  fiscal  matters,  the 
responsible  courts  are  fiscal  courts  at  first  and  second  instance  and  the  High  Court  of 
Cassation  at  the  highest  level.  The  structure  of  the  prosecution  service  mirrors  that  of  the 
courts.  Italy  participates  in  the  European  Public  Prosecutor’s  Office  (EPPO).  According  to 
the  principle  of  unity  of  the  judiciary,  ordinary  judges  and  public  prosecutors  are  all 
magistrates, have a common career structure, and are governed by the High Council for the 
Judiciary1. Administrative, accounting and fiscal magistrates have their own self-government 
bodies. The National Bar Council is an independent and self-governing body established by 
law.  The  Constitutional  Court  decides 
the 
constitutionality of laws. 

in  exclusivity  on  disputes  regarding 

Independence  

The  level  of  perceived  judicial  independence  in  Italy  continues  to  be  low  among  the 
general  public,  while  it  is  average  among  companies.  Overall,  37%  of  the  general 
population and 40% of companies perceive the level of independence of courts and judges to 
be ‘fairly or very good’ in 20222. According to data in the 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard, the 
perceived  judicial  independence  among  the  general  public  has  consistently  increased  since 
2016.  Both  figures  have  increased  in  comparison  to  2021  (34%  for  the  general  public  and 
29% for companies), as well as in comparison to 2016 (25% for the general public and 24% 
for companies). 

The  newly  adopted  law  for  the  reform  of  the  High  Council  for  the  Judiciary  (CSM) 
aims  at  addressing  challenges  relating  to  the  representativeness  of  its  members.  Since 
August 2020 a draft law increasing the number of the members of the CSM and modifying 
the way in which they are elected, to enhance their independence vis-à-vis their professional 
associations3, was pending before Parliament. On 16 June 2022, the Parliament approved the 
new law4, including on the number of CSM members5 and the way in which they are elected6. 

1   Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura (CSM) in Italian. 
2   Figures 50 and 52, 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard. The level of perceived judicial independence is categorised 
as  follows:  very  low  (below  30%  of  respondents  perceive  judicial  independence  as  fairly  good  and  very 
good); low (between 30-39%), average (between 40-59%), high (between 60-75%), very high (above 75%). 

3   2021 and 2020 Rule of Law Reports, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, pp. 2 and 3.  
4   Law  n. 71 of 17 June 2022, published on the  State Gazette  on 20 June 2022 and entered into force on 21 
June  2022,  empowers  the  Government  to  reform  the  justice  system  and  adapt  the  military  justice  system, 
providing  also  for  provisions  on  legal,  organisational  and  disciplinary  matters,  on  eligibility  and 
redeployment of magistrates, on establishment and functioning of the CSM. 

5   The number is increased from 24 to 30 (20 tenure magistrates chosen by their peers and ten members elected 
by  the  Parliament  among  law  professors  and  lawyers  with  at  least  15  years  of  experience).  See  also  2020 
Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, p.3. 

6   Law  no.  71  of  17  June  2022  provides  that  the  electoral  system  be  a  prevailing  majority  system  with  a 
correction  towards  a  proportional  system  which  aims  to  offer  to  minority  groups  a  representation  in  the 
CSM. (Art. 29 and following of the law). 

3 

 
                                                 
The current CSM will end its mandate on 24 September 20227. On 23 March 2022, the CSM 
issued an opinion on the draft law. While supporting the proposed new electoral system8, the 
CSM  underlined  that  some  provisions  might  undermine  the  independent  functioning  of  the 
body9.  

Stricter  rules  on  ‘revolving  doors’  for  the  judiciary  and  other  positive  provisions  are 
also  included in the  newly  adopted law.  The  new legislation10 also  addresses  the topic of 
direct  participation  of  magistrates  in  political  life  which  has  been  raised  as  a  concern  by 
GRECO11.  The  law  introduces  stricter  provisions,  including  the  ineligibility  to  elected 
positions  of  magistrates  who  have  been  on  duty  with  judicial  offices  located  in  the 
constituency in the three years before the election12 and a cooling-off period of 3 years if not 
elected13. They also include the prohibition to simultaneously exercise judicial functions and 
elected/governmental  ones14  and  the  prohibition  for  magistrates  who  have  held  elected 
positions to come back to the bench at the end of their term of office. Further positive aspects 
of  the  law  include  a  faster  access  to  the  competition  to  access  the  judiciary,  and  new 
trainings, including on statistical data. On 23 March 2022, the CSM assessed such set of rules 
largely positively15. 

The CSM and other stakeholders have raised concerns that some provisions of the draft 
law on the reform of the CSM and the justice system could result in an undue influence 
on  judges.  The  law,  approved  by  the  Parliament  on  16  June,  provides  the  reform  of  the 
justice  system  and  includes  provisions  on  the  establishment  and  functioning  of  the  High 
Council  for  the  Judiciary.  Its  implementing  legislation  is  due  within  one  year.  The  new 

7   Written contribution from the CSM in the context of the country visit, p.1. 
8   Opinion of the CSM of 23 March 2022 (on amendments to draft law A.C. 2681 containing, among others, 
provisions  on  the  organisation,  eligibility  and  appointment  of  magistrates  and  the  establishment  and 
functioning of the CSM). In particular, it underlines that the system for the election of the judicial members 
is predominantly majority with a proportional corrective measure and limits the possibility of drawing by lot 
to marginal applications. 2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation for Italy, p. 
4; Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 of Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, para. 27.  

9   For instance, those relating to the discretionary power of the Ministry of Justice to build electoral colleges 
ahead of the election, as  well as the absence of any ineligibility clause for lay members aiming to prevent 
any political or partisan influence. See CCJE Opinion No. 24 (2021) on the ‘Evolution of the Councils for 
the  Judiciary  and  their  role  in  independent  and  impartial  judicial  systems’,  p.  4  and  Recommendation 
CM/Rec(2010)12 of Committee of Ministers of Council of Europe, paras. 26- 29. 

10   Law no. 71 of 17 June 2022. 
11   GRECO Fourth Evaluation Round – Second Compliance Report, recommendation x. See also the opinion of 

the CSM, of 21 April 2021. 

12   They also need to take leave without pay at the moment of the acceptance of the candidacy. See Art. 12 para 

5 which refers to ineligibility for CSM members.  

13   Magistrates may not be reassigned for three years to a judicial office located in the constituency where they 
ran  as  candidates,  nor  may  they  be  reassigned  to  the  district  where  they  used  to  exert  judicial  functions 
before running for a political mandate. A three-year ban, without territorial exceptions, is provided for the 
functions of pre-trial investigation judge and preliminary hearing judge or public prosecutor, and to hold or 
be assigned high or middle managerial positions. 

14   Magistrates  holding  or  taking  over  political  or  government  offices,  must  take  leave  without  pay  and  be 

deployed outside the judiciary for the whole duration of the mandate, 

15   Opinion  of  the  CSM  dated  23  March  2022,  p.  146.  The  Opinion  issued  by  the  CSM  on  29  April  2021 
criticised the reduction in the number of the changes in functions among judges and prosecutors (from four 
to two times, now further reduced to one) as this would lead to the separation of the career of a judge and the 
career of a prosecutor. 

4 

 
                                                 
legislation  regulates  the  organisational  powers  of  courts  presidents16.  In  particular,  it 
introduces a professional evaluation of magistrates, which, among other things, will take into 
account the achievement of expected results set by presidents of courts17 and the possibility to 
initiate disciplinary action for non-compliance with instructions from presidents of courts as 
to  the  expected  results18.  Furthermore,  it  envisages  the  reduction  of  the  number  of  middle 
managerial  positions19  and  regulates  powers  for  the  First  President  of  the  High  Court  of 
Cassation20.  Moreover,  the  professional  evaluation  for  high-level  positions  will  take  into 
account the outcome of the ruling in subsequent instances21, which may be seen as implicitly 
calling  for  a  uniform  ruling  on  certain  topics22.  While  these  provisions  aim  at  increasing 
efficiency, they have been criticised by the CSM and the National Association of Magistrates 
(ANM) for a tendency towards an increased internal judicial hierarchy23 and a potential use 
of disciplinary proceedings as an instrument of governance of judicial offices24. The Ministry 
of Justice noted that the new organisational measures would not impact the decision making 
autonomy  and  independence  of  magistrates25.  The  combined  effect  of  the  new  provisions 
may  lead  to  dependencies  which  may  entail  undue  influence  on  judge’s  independence. 
However, implementing legislation will provide the opportunity for more detailed provisions 
on  how  judicial  independence  is  ensured.  According  to  European  standards,  the  search  for 
enhanced efficiency should not compromise judicial independence26. 

16   The main innovations reported are: i) the introduction of a procedure requiring Heads, both of Chambers and 
Office,  to  actively  take  charge  (for  prevention  and  remedy  purposes)  of  situations  of  suffering,  that  may 
consist  both  of  accrued  delays  in  the  definition  of  the  proceedings  by  the  judges  and  difficulties  of  a 
Chamber  in  coping  with  the  definition  of  contingencies  ii)  the  results  expected  by  each  Chamber  or 
magistrate must also be identified in the annual management program (previously, reference was made to the 
judicial office only as a whole). Furthermore, the Head of the Office must comply with the workload limits 
of the  magistrates identified by  the competent  self-governing bodies (Art.  14 of the Law  n. 71 of 17 June 
2022).  

17   Art. 3 para 1 lett. d) of the Law no. 71 of 17 June 2022: the annual management programs drawn up by the 

head of the Office has to be taken into account. . 

18   Art.  11  of  the  Law  no.  71  of  17  June  2022.  The  law  introduces  new  disciplinary  offences  related  to 
efficiency  which  are  reported  to  entail  the  risk  to  ‘transform  disciplinary  proceedings  in  an  instrument  of 
governance  of  the  offices’  (Opinion  of  the  CSM  dated  23  March  2022,  p.  23).  See  also  the  written  input 
from the Court of Cassation as to the personal file of magistrates. 

19   Art. 2, para 1 lett. n) of the Law no. 71 of 17 June 2022. Opinion of the CSM dated 23 March 2022 p. 84. 
See also written contribution from the National Association of Magistrates in the context of the country visit. 
20   Art.  7  of  the  Law  no.  71  of  17  June  2022.  See  also  the  Opinion  of  the  CSM  dated  23  March  2022  p.  94 
referring to the power to allocate to the chambers of the High Court of Cassation, judges of the Abstracts and 
Rolls Office, without the involvement of the CSM. 

21   The Judicial Council must acquire necessary information to ascertain the existence of serious anomalies in 
relation to the outcomes of the cases in the phases or instances following the proceedings (art. 3 lett. g) of the 
Law no. 71 of 17 June 2022).  

22   Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 of Committee of Ministers of Council of Europe: Para 5: ‘Judges should 
have unfettered freedom to decide cases impartially, in accordance with the law and their interpretation of 
the facts’. See also the Opinion of the CSM dated 23 March 2022, which underlines a limitation to judicial 
independence in the application of the law. 

23   See Opinion of the CSM dated 23 March 2022, p. 108 and following, which underlines that the managerial 
programme is an instrument which refers to expected results of the court and not of individual judges and 
deplores the deletion of the reference to an acceptable workload set by CSM. See also written contribution 
from the National Association of Magistrates in the context of the country visit. In the same direction, see 
also the written contribution from the Court of Cassation as to the personal file of magistrates. 

24   Opinion of the CSM dated 23 March 2022, p. 23.  
25   Written contribution from the Ministry of Justice. 
26   Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 of Committee of Ministers of Council of Europe, para. 22. The principle 
of  judicial  independence  means  the  independence  of  each  individual  judge  in  the  exercise  of  adjudicating 

5 

 
                                                 
 
Further provisions of the newly adopted law aim to confer voting powers of lawyers on 
appraisal of magistrates. The new legislation27 introduces the power for lawyers to vote at 
Local Councils for the Judiciary28 on the appraisal of magistrates29. While being members of 
the  local  Councils  for  the  Judiciary,  the  lawyers  continue  to  exercise  their  profession.  The 
CSM and the ANM have raised the concern that this may constitute a conflict of interest30, 
due to the absence of incompatibility rules31. The Ministry of Justice noted that the new law 
introduces  some  safeguards  aiming  to  eliminate  the  risk  of  conflict  of  interest  of  lawyers 
called to cast a vote on the assessment of the professionalism of the magistrates32. 

Further  measures  have  been  adopted  to  continue  to  address  integrity  challenges.  The 
CSM  has  continued  to  take  additional  action  as  regards  serious  allegations  relating  to 
magistrates  disclosed  by  a  criminal  investigation  which  led  to  the  resignation  of  five 
members  of  the  CSM33.  This  includes  opening  additional  disciplinary  proceedings  against 
magistrates34,  decisions  not  to  confirm  magistrates  in  high  level  position  functions35,  and 

functions. In their decision making judges should be independent and impartial and able to act without any 
restriction,  improper  influence,  pressure,  threat  or  interference,  direct  or  indirect,  from  any  authority, 
including  authorities  internal  to  the  judiciary.  Hierarchical  judicial  organisation  should  not  undermine 
individual independence. See also CM/Rec(2010)12 of Committee of Ministers of Council of Europe, para 
37. 

27   Law no. 71 of 17 June 2022. On increased powers of  lay members of the CSM, on 16 February 2022, the 
Constitutional Court admitted a referendum which was held on 12 June 2022, but did not reach the necessary 
quorum. 

28   Leg. Decree n. 25 of 2006: lay members of Local Councils for the Judiciary are lawyers and professors and 
issue every four years non-binding opinion, not subject to judicial review for the appraisal of magistrates. 
29   The Bar Council can inform local Councils on specific facts related to professional activities of magistrates 

(Art. 11 of the Leg. Decree No. 160/2006). With the new amendments, lawyers will be able to vote.  

30   Opinion of the CSM dated 23 March 2022, pp. 58-60 (as to a case pending before the judge concerned where 
the  lawyer  in  the  Local  Council  for  the  Judiciary  has  an  interest  as  to  the  outcome  of  the  case).  See  also 
written contribution from the National Association of Magistrates in the context of the country visit, p. 3. 
31   Opinion of the CSM dated 23 March 2022 pp. 58-60 (incompatibility between being a voting member of the 
Local Council for the Judiciary and simultaneously being registered in the professional district bar). See also 
written  contribution  from  the  National  Association  of  Magistrates  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit,  p.  3. 
This voting power, together with the involvement of the bar as regards the procedure to select magistrates for 
high level managerial positions, raises concerns as judges may need to deal with lawyers in proceedings who 
at  the  same  time  have  a  say  on  their  professional  advancement  (see  Consultative  Council  of  European 
Judges,  Opinion  No.  17  (2014)  on  the  evaluation  of  judges’  work,  the  quality  of  justice  and  respect  for 
judicial independence, para 31). 

32   Art.  3  lett.  a)  of  the  Law  no.  71  of  17  June  2022.  The  lawyers  in  the  local  Councils  for  the  Judiciary, 
whatever their number is, will be able to cast a single unitary vote but only on the basis and in conformity 
with  the  report  of  specific  facts,  whether  positive  or  negative,  relating  to  the  professionalism  of  the 
magistrate,  produced  by  the  Council  of  the  Bar  Association.  Written  contribution  from  the  Ministry  of 
Justice. 

33   2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, pp. 3-4. 
34   Information received from the CSM in the context of the country visit. See also collection of decisions from 

2021 on the website of the CSM under disciplinary section.  

35   Information received from the CSM in the context of the  country visit. See also decisions on the career of 

magistrates available on the website of the CSM. 

6 

 
                                                                                                                                                        
administrative transfers36. Secondary legislation has been revised to improve the functioning 
and the independence of the CSM37.  

Quality  

Significant  recruitments  are  ongoing  for  both  judicial  and  administrative  staff,  while 
specific measures are envisaged to support the work of judges. Despite the impact of the 
COVID-19 pandemic on the recruitment of judicial staff which prevented the competition to 
take place in 2020, in July 2021, a competition for 310 posts for judges and prosecutors was 
launched and should be completed by the end of 202238. A new competition for 500 posts for 
judges  and  prosecutors  is  expected  to  start  by  June  202239.  However,  from  the  time  the 
examination is announced to the time the positions are actually filled, there is a delay of at 
least  four  years40.  Administrative  staff,  especially  law  clerks  and  legal  assistants,  has 
substantially increased in 2021 (4 837 posts compared to 1 920 posts in 2020). In the context 
of the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (RRP), specific measures by temporary hiring 
of administrative staff41 are envisaged to support the work of judges42. This support team was 
reorganised  as  part  of  the  existing  Office  of  the  Trial43,  a  structure  aimed  at  ensuring  a 
reasonable length of the trial44. On 6 August 2021, a national competition took place to select 
8 171 people to be included in the offices of the trial at civil and criminal courts. The selected 
staff started work in February 202245. These measures also aim at reducing case backlogs and 
improving efficiency, and include staff training to meet the digital transition challenges in the 
justice system. They help addressing a long-standing country-specific recommendation issued 
in the context of the European Semester on the efficiency of the justice system46. In addition, 
on 27 December 2021,  a Decree of the Minister  of Justice identified the  criteria, minimum 

36   Art.  2  of  Royal  Decree  No.  511  of  1946  as  amended  by  Art.  26  of  Legislative  Decree  No.  109  of  2006: 
transfers  apply  whenever  the  magistrate  cannot  perform  any  more  his/her  functions  in  his/her  office  with 
independence  and  impartiality,  for  a  cause  which  is  independent  from  his/her  fault.  Information  received 
from the CSM in the context of the country visit. See also collection of decisions from 2021 on the website 
of the CSM under disciplinary section 

37   Decision of the CSM of 16 March 2022 related to the  selection procedure for magistrates at the Secretary 
and at the Study Office of the CSM; Memorandum of understanding between the CSM, the National School 
for  the  Judiciary  and  the  Ministry  of  Justice,  of  22  December  2021  for  training  related  to  high  level 
positions; Decision of the CSM 22 December 2021 regarding managerial positions.  

38   Written  contribution  from  the  Ministry  of  Justice  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit,  ‘Office  of  the  Trial, 

flexible task forces and recruitment of ordinary magistrates’, pp. 18 and 19.  

39   Ibid, pp. 18 and 19.  
40   According to the Third Commission of the CSM, there is a national shortage of 15%, since there are 1.568 
vacant  positions  compared  to  10.558  available  positions  in  the  workforce.  Written  contribution  from  the 
CSM. 

41   21 910 posts for civil and criminal courts to be recruited by Q2 2024, see also numbers of temporary staff 
allocated to 225 courts (written contribution from the Minister of Justice in the context of the country visit, 
pp. 5-9). 

42   This will support study, legal research, drafting of acts and organisation of files. Decision of the CSM of 13 
October  2021  on  guidelines  for  the  Office  of  the  Trial.  See  also  the  Decision  of  the  CSM  of  23  February 
2022 related to the establishment of a technical table aiming at planning training of staff of the Trial Office. 

43   Council Recommendations of 2013-2020 on the efficiency of the Italian justice system. 
44   In the context of the RRP, the remodelling of the office  of the trial, together  with the digitalisation of the 
justice  system  and  the  reforms  of  civil  and  criminal  procedures  are  the  main  axes  of  the  comprehensive 
reform  of  the  justice  system  aiming  at  addressing  2020  and  2019  country-specific  recommendations  on 
improving the efficiency of the judicial system. 

45   Written contribution from the Minister of Justice in the context of the country visit, p. 9 (6 471 recruitments 

have already taken place). 

46   2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, p. 8, footnote 71. 

7 

 
                                                 
duration and priority rules, also based on the targets set in Italy’s RRP, to activate an ad hoc 
flexible  task  force47.  It  also  completed  the  legal  framework  for  magistrates  to  be  allocated 
where  most  needed  in  each  judicial  office  in  a  critical  situation.  For  administrative  justice, 
specific  recruitments  for  temporary  staff  are  also  envisaged  in  the  context  of  the  RRP48;  a 
competition for 168 units started in July 2021 and 162 selected staff signed their contract in 
early 202249.  

Digitalisation  of  the  justice  system  is  progressing  in  civil  and  administrative  courts, 
while  challenges  remain  in  criminal  courts  and  prosecution  offices.  While  already 
completed  at  first  and  second  instance  of  civil  courts50,  the  digitalisation  of  proceedings  is 
still  in  progress  at  the  civil  sections  of  the  Court  of  Cassation51.  For  Judges  of  Peace, 
electronic communication has been extended also for interaction with public administrations, 
and the management of electronic filing of documents by lawyers is expected to be completed 
by June 202252. However, at criminal courts, digitalisation of trials is still at the beginning53 
and  is  expected  to  be  completed  only  for  the  first  instance  by  late  202354.  At  prosecution 
offices,  digitalisation  still  faces  some  challenges,  but  there  are  efforts  to  improve55.  In 
administrative  proceedings,  digitalisation  is  the  rule  except  for  the  hearings56.  In  particular, 
rules  are  in  place  that  allow,  in  some  cases,  to  use  distance  communication  technology  in 
hearings57. Secure electronic communication is now available between all courts, between all 
courts and lawyers, detention facilities and notaries, and between some courts and bailiffs58. 
Digital solutions to initiate and follow proceedings have been further expanded, especially in 
civil  and  commercial  proceedings  where  it  is  now  also  possible  in  some  cases  to  file  an 

47   Decree  of  the  Minister  of  Justice  of  27  December  2021,  published  on  the  Official  Gazette  No.  34  of  10 
February 2022. See also Decree of the Minister of Justice dated 23 March 2022 which sets the total number 
of flexible task force in 179 posts, 125 with judicial function and 54 with prosecutorial function.  

48   According  to  the  RRP,  recruitments  of  168  units  are  envisaged  to  start  by  the  end  of  2022  for  identified 

courts where backlogs are most important.  

49   Written contribution from the Council of State in the context of the country visit, p. 4. 
50   2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, p. 5. 
51   A double path still allows paper filing of documents. The written contribution from the Court of Cassation in 
the context of the country visit underlines the cooperation with lawyers leading to 40% of electronic filings 
for  new  enrolments.  However,  it  is  underlined  the  importance  to  speed  up  the  possibility  to  have  digital 
access to the  file existing at lower instances. In the context of the  RRP,  mandatory electronic filing of all 
documents and full electronic workflow for civil proceedings is due by late 2023. 
52   Written contribution from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit. 
53   Figure 47, 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
54   In  the  context  of  the  RRP,  digitalisation  of  first  instance  criminal  proceedings  (excluding  preliminary 

hearing office) is due by Q4 2023. 

55   The  Ministry  of  Justice  is  developing  the  web  portals  that  would  allow  for  receiving  electronically 
notification  for  crime  offences  from  law  enforcement  and  would  permit  lawyers  to  submit  electronically 
criminal  files  to  the  prosecution  offices.  In  addition,  an  internal  Work  Flow  Manager  system  is  being 
developed for judges and prosecutors. See written contribution from the Ministry of Justice, Digitalisation, 
p. 3 in the context of the country visit. See also  Figure 43, 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard: the use of digital 
technology by the prosecution service has improved leading to the possibility for staff to work remotely but 
only in limited cases.  

56   Written contribution from the Council of State in the context of the country visit, p. 4: all aspects of the trial 
are completely digitalised, from the filing of the case till the electronic signature of the ruling except for the 
hearings (during COVID-19 pandemic remote hearings have taken place).  

57   It  is  possible  in  some  cases  to  use  distance  communication  technology  for  interpretation  and  for  hearing 

experts, witnesses and parties. Figure 42, 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard. 

58   Figure  44,  2022  EU  Justice  Scoreboard.  See  also  2022  Report  of  the  First  President  at  the  High  Court  of 
Cassation  which  underlines  the  existence  of  a  cooperation  project  to  manage  electronically  data  flows 
between  administrative  justice  (Council  of  State  and  first  instance  administrative  judges)  and  the  Court  of 
Cassation regarding matters of jurisdiction of common interest. 

8 

 
                                                 
application for legal aid  online59. Training for judicial and administrative staff on enhanced 
digitalisation  of  the  justice  system  has  started60.  Furthermore,  a  cooperation  started  on  29 
September 2021 between the judiciary and the academia in order to develop algorithm-based 
search  engine  for  legal  analysis  and  artificial  intelligence  tools  applied  to  case  law61.  The 
High  Court  of  Cassation,  the  Council  of  State  and  the  Court  of  Auditors,  together  with  the 
Data  Protection  Authority,  have  started  to  cooperate  with  the  aim  to  explore  common 
procedures  to  anonymise  personal  and  sensitive  data,  notably  those  included  in  publicly 
accessible judicial databases62.  

A  comprehensive  reform  of  tax  courts  of  first  and  second  instances  is  foreseen  by  the 
end of 2022. A new technical and operational committee has been tasked to draft a legislative 
proposal  reforming  tax  justice63,  including  tax  courts64.  The  draft  aims  at  introducing  a 
gradual turnover mechanism to replace part-time tax judges with full-time judges. It also aims 
at introducing a mechanism allowing to end proceedings after a certain period of time, in the 
absence  of  an  interest  of  the  parties  not  to  close  the  case.  It  also  creates  a  facilitated 
settlement  of  pending  disputes65.  In  order  to  improve  efficiency,  on  19  October  2021,  the 
Court  of  Cassation  and  the  Ministry  of  Economy  and  Finance,  signed  an  agreement66 
allowing  the  judges  of  the  High  Court  of  Cassation  to  access  the  information  technology 
system of tax justice of first and second instances67.  

Standards  to  improve  the  quality  of  judicial  decisions  have  been  included  in  the 
enabling  law  for  the  efficiency  of  civil  trials.  Law  No.  206  of  26  November  2021  has 
introduced standards for clarity and conciseness for judicial decisions and for judicial acts of 
lawyers68.  Stakeholders  have  pointed  out  that  electronic  filing  through  a  structured  format 
would facilitate the registration and the examination of the act and would consequently allow 
for clear and concise rulings, aiming also at efficiency gains69. 

One  additional  region  has  been  admitted  to  the  Proximity  Offices  project  to  enhance 
access  to  justice.  Three-fourths  of  regions  have  now  been  allowed  to  establish  proximity 
offices  to  facilitate  access  to  justice  especially  for  vulnerable  groups70.  Such  offices  will 
inform users about legal protection and access to justice in proceedings where no assistance 

59   Figure 46, 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
60   2022  Report  of  the  First  President  at  the  High  Court  of  Cassation:  in  October  2021,  specific  training  has 

been provided to Presidents of panels and further extended in December 2021 to all judges. 

61   2022 Report of the First President at the High Court of Cassation, p. 109, agreement between the High Court 

of Cassation and the University School of Higher Studies of Pavia. 

62   2022 Report of the First President at the High Court of Cassation, p. 110. 
63   In the context of the RRP, the reform aims to decrease the incoming cases at the Court of Cassation and at a 

more effective system regarding tax law is due by late 2022. 

64   See also 2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, p. 6 
65   Written  contribution  from  the  Minister  of  Justice  (input  from  Legislative  Office)  in  the  context  of  the 

country visit. 

66   2022 Report of the First President at the High Court of Cassation, p. 99. 
67   Electronic storage of the case law of High Court of Cassation in this system should raise awareness on main 

interpretative trends on tax law cases and thereby help decreasing litigation. 

68   Art. 1, para 17 of the Law No. 206/2021. See also written contribution from the Ministry of Justice in the 
context  of  the  country  visit,  p.  7.  See  also  2021  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Country  Chapter  on  the  rule  of  law 
situation in Italy, p. 6. 

69   Written contribution from the Court of Cassation in the context of the country visit. 
70   2020 and 2021 Rule of Law Reports, Country Chapters on the rule of law situation in Italy, p. 6. 

9 

 
                                                 
of a lawyer is needed, facilitate the electronic filing of documents, obtain copies of judicial 
acts through simplified procedures, and ease contacts with the judiciary for some topics71. 

New  provisions  regarding  criminal  justice  aim  at  efficiency  gains  and  need  close 
monitoring to ensure the effectiveness of the justice system is maintained. The reform for 
the  efficiency  of  criminal  justice72  also  includes  some  provisions  applicable  for  crimes 
committed after 1 January 2020, setting maximum time limits to conclude trials at the Court 
of  Appeal  and  the  High  Court  of  Cassation,  otherwise  the  case  will  be  barred73.  Due  to 
efficiency  issues  especially  at  appeal  level,  the  new  measures  risk  to  negatively  impact  the 
criminal trials, especially ongoing ones, as they could be automatically terminated. Although 
exceptions74 have been introduced and temporary rules are in place75, the effectiveness of the 
criminal  justice system requires close monitoring  at  national  level  to  ensure a right  balance 
between  the  introduction  of  the  new  provisions  and  the  rights  of  the  defence,  the  rights  of 
victims  and  the  interest  of  the  public  in  efficient  criminal  proceedings76.  To  that  aim,  a 
technical-scientific Committee established at the Ministry of Justice will monitor the gradual 
transition to the new regime77. 

Efficiency 

The length of proceedings is still a serious challenge. In 2020, disposition times78 showed 
an increase at  all instances  both  for civil  and commercial litigious  cases79, and for criminal 

71   Written  contribution  from  the  Ministry  of  Justice  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit,  p.1.  The  proximity 
offices aim e.g. to arrange remote hearings between vulnerable persons and guardianship court members.  
72   Law  No.  134  of  27  September  2021  introduced  Art.  344  bis  of  the  Criminal  Procedure  Code  as  of  19 

October 2021. 

73   This will happen even if the statute of limitation has not run out. See Law No. 134 of 27 September 2021, 

Art. 161 bis: statute of limitation stops with first instance ruling.  

74   Law No. 134 of 27 September 2021: in case of complex cases for all crimes, judges may extend the duration 
of the time limit for the trial (i.e. prolongation of one year for the Court of Appeal, and six months for the 
High Court of Cassation, for a total maximum of three years for the Court of Appeal and one year and half 
for  the  High  Court  of  Cassation);  for  terrorism,  mafia  type  organised  crime,  mafia  political  electoral 
exchange  crime,  sexual  violence  and  drugs  smuggling,  extensions  can  be  made  without  a  maximum  time 
limit for the trial; for crimes aggravated by the mafia method, the extension is up to five years for the Court 
of Appeal,  and two years and six  months  for the  High Court of Cassation). In addition, time limits do not 
work for the crimes punished with life imprisonment (Art. 344 bis para 9) and whenever the indicted person 
asks for the continuation of the trial (Art. 344 bis para 7). 

75   Law No. 134 of 27 September 2021: three years at the Court of Appeal and one year and a half at the High 

Court of Cassation for three years since the entry into force of the reform. 

76   See the Opinion of the CSM dated 29 July 2021, on the amendments of the Government dated 14 July 2021. 
77   See Decree of the Minister of Justice dated 28 December 2021, implementing Art. 16 para 2 of Law No. 134 
of 27 September 2021. See also, for the High Court of Cassation, 2022 Report of the First President at the 
High Court of Cassation, p. 102. 

78   2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, footnote 56: The disposition 
time is the theoretical time necessary for a pending case to be solved in court and is obtained by dividing the 
number of pending cases at the end of the observed period by the number of resolved cases within the same 
period multiplied by 365. 

79   Figure  8,  2022  EU  Justice  Scoreboard.  See  also  CEPEJ  (2021)  Study  on  the  functioning  of  the  judicial 
system in the EU Member States: in 2020, civil and commercial litigious case lasted on average 674 days in 
first  instance,  1026  days  in  second  instance  and  1526  days  in  third  instance  (compared  to  CEPEJ  2020 
Study, for 2019, civil and commercial litigious case lasted on average 532 days in first instance, 791 days in 
second instance and 1302 days in third instance).  

10 

 
                                                 
cases80.  The  temporary  slowdown  of  judicial  activity  due  to  severe  restrictive  measures 
adopted  to  address  the  COVID-19  pandemic  in  2020  had  an  impact  on  both  incoming  and 
resolved cases with a strong influence on disposition time81. Accordingly, provisional data on 
disposition time for 2021 show a clear drop back to pre-pandemic values82. At the High Court 
of Cassation, a positive development is observed as incoming cases continue to decrease and 
resolved cases  continue  to  increase83. However, in 2021, more than half of the cases in  the 
field  of  international  protection  have  been  declared  inadmissible84  and  tax  court  cases 
registered high rates of annulments85. Administrative courts kept decreasing disposition time 
at all instances86, with continued positives results in some areas such as public procurement87 
and  electoral  matters88.  Italy  remains  under  the  enhanced  supervision  of  the  Council  of 
Europe’s Committee of Ministers as regards length of proceedings in administrative cases89 
and length of proceedings in criminal cases90.  

A  comprehensive  long-awaited  civil  justice  reform  has  been  adopted,  aiming  at 
addressing efficiency challenges. In the context of the RRP, Italy has committed to reducing 
by  40%  the  disposition  time  at  three  instances  of  civil  justice  by  late  202691.  On  26 
November 2021, Parliament adopted an enabling law92 on the efficiency of civil proceedings 

80   CEPEJ  (2021)  Study  on  the  functioning  of  the  judicial  system  in  the  EU  Member  States:  in  2020,  the 
average length of criminal cases was 498 days in first instance, 1 167 days in second instance and 237 days 
in third instance.  

81   CEPEJ (2021) Study on the functioning of the judicial system in the EU Member States, country fiche for 

Italy. See also Figure 8 EU Justice Scoreboard 2022. 

82   Written contribution from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit (General Directorate for 
Statistics):  in  2021,  civil  and  commercial  litigious  cases  lasted  on  average  567  days  at  first  instance,  663 
days at second instance and 1002 days at third instance; in 2021, criminal law cases  lasted on average 423 
days in first instance, 909 days in second instance and 184 days in third instance. 

83   Written  contribution  from  the  High  Court  of  Cassation  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit:  incoming  cases 
from  36 881  in  2018  to  31 544  in  2021;  resolved  cases  from  32 441  in  2018  to  40 757  in  2021.  CEPEJ 
(2021) Study on the functioning of the judicial system in the EU Member States: clearance rate at the civil 
High Court of Cassation in 2020 increased by 4% up to 89%, while at the criminal High Court of Cassation 
in 2020 the clearance rate was 98%.  

84   2022 Report of the First President of the Court of Cassation, synthesis, p. 10: international protection cases 
have been attributed to the High Court of Cassation by law and, not having an appeal level, they reverse at 
the  level  of  the  High  Court  of  Cassation  issues  of  merit,  which  are  not  in  the  remit  of  the  High  Court  of 
Cassation which deals only with legality issues. Therefore, this the Court of Cassation receives applications ‐ 
often benefitting from legal aid. 

85   2022 Report of the First President of the Court of Cassation synthesis, p. 11: more than half of the resolved 
cases at the tax section of the High Court of Cassation are annulment of lower instance rulings. This suggests 
that the quality of lower instance rulings is not high. (5 713 cases annulled and 4 271 cases dismissed). 

86   CEPEJ  (2021)  Study  on  the  functioning  of  the  judicial  system  in  the  EU  Member  States:  in  2020, 
administrative  cases  lasted  on  average  862  days  in  first  instance  and  667  in  second  instance.  In  2021, 
administrative courts further decreased disposition time (756 days in first instance and 658 days in second 
instance).  See  also  written  contribution  from  the  Council  of  State  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit:  the 
instrument of the ‘short ruling’ allows judges to decide the case following a request for an urgent measure 
(Art. 120 para. 6 of the Administrative Procedure Code). 

87   Written contribution from the Council of State in the context of the country visit: on average, in 2020, 205 

days in first instance (in 2021, 174 days) and 253 days at second instance (in 2021, 276 days).  

88   Written contribution from the Council of State in the context of the country visit: on average, in 2020, 170 

days in first instance and 49 days at second instance.  

89   Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 2 September 1997, Abenavoli v. Italy, 24487/94. 
90   Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 12 May 1999, Ledonne v Italy, 35742/97  
91   RRP, M1C1-45 related to civil and commercial litigious cases compared to 2019. 
92   Law No. 206 of 26 November 2021, entered into force on 24 December 2021. See also 2021 Rule of Law 

Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, p. 8. 

11 

 
                                                 
and  the  revision  of  alternative  dispute  resolution  (ADR)  measures,  together  with  directly 
applicable provisions on family law, forced execution and right of citizenship. It sets out the 
principle  aiming  to  reduce  the  length  of  civil  proceedings.  A  reduction  of  number  of 
incoming  cases  in  courts  is  envisaged  through  increased  recourse  to  ADR  mainly  by 
strengthening mediation93 and arbitration94, by introducing fiscal incentives and legal aid for 
those procedures, and by reviewing the current system of quantification and recoverability of 
legal  fees to  discourage  frivolous litigations95. A simplification of proceedings is  envisaged 
by introducing the possibility to  declare an appeal  clearly unfounded96, extending the  cases 
where a single judge is competent to adjudicate and securing the implementation of binding 
timeframes  for  procedures  especially  at  first  instance.  At  the  High  Court  of  Cassation  the 
filter  section  will  be  abolished  and  an  accelerated  procedure97  and  a  preliminary  ruling 
procedure will be introduced98. The reform aims at harmonising performances across courts 
through  a  monitoring  system  and  incentives  to  accomplish  standard  performance.  Together 
with  staff  recruitment  (Office  for  the  Trial)  and  increased  digitalisation,  implementing 
legislation, due by late 2022, is important in order to reach the final targets of the RRP99. On 
14  January  2022,  the  Minister  of  Justice  established  seven  working  groups  to  draft 
implementing legislation by 15 May 2022100. 

A  comprehensive  long-awaited  criminal  justice  reform  has  been  adopted,  aiming  at 
addressing efficiency challenges. In the context of the RRP, Italy committed to reducing by 
25%  the  disposition  time  at  three  instances  of  criminal  justice  by  late  2026101.  On  27 
September  2021,  Parliament  adopted  an  enabling  law102  on  the  efficiency  of  criminal  trials 
and  restorative  justice,  together  with  directly  applicable  provisions  for  a  swift  definition  of 
criminal  cases.  It  aims  at  reducing  the  length  of  criminal  proceedings  i.a.  by  extending  the 
application  of  simplified  procedures103,  broadening  the  use  of  digital  technology104,  and 
defining time limits for the preliminary investigation105. It also allows a wider intervention of 

93   Increased  economic  and  fiscal  incentives,  and  expansion  of  mandatory  out-of-court  settlements  in 
compliance  with  EU  law  (see  2021  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Country  Chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in 
Italy, p. 8 and footnote 77, and written contribution from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country 
visit, pp. 12 and 13). 

94   Increased independence and impartiality safeguards for arbitrators by a disclosure duty and introduction of 
possibility to issue interim measures (Written contribution from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the 
country visit, p. 5).  

95   Law No. 206 of 26 November 2021, Art. 1 para 5, 7, 8 and 17 aiming at reducing frivolous litigations. 
96   When it appears it would not succeed (Law No. 206 of 26 November 2021, Art. 1 para. 8).  
97   Implementing legislation may take into account that the single judge who proposes the accelerated procedure 
could  shorten  the  proceedings  by  eliminating  the  oral  hearing  (written  contribution  from  the  Court  of 
Cassation in the context of the country visit). 

98   The preliminary ruling procedure aims at providing lower courts with clear interpretative criteria in order to 
decrease future potential litigations as the outcome of the case appears more predictable (written contribution 
from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit, p. 8). 

99   2022 Report of the First President at the High Court of Cassation, synthesis, p. 7. 
100  Decree of the Minister of Justice dated 14 January 2022. 
101  RRP, M1C1-46 related to criminal cases compared to 2019. 
102  Law No. 134 of 27 September 2021, entered into force on 19 October 2021. Implementing legislation is due 
by  19  October  2022.  See  also  2021  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Country  Chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in 
Italy, p. 8. 

103  Law No. 134 of 27 September 2021, Art. 1 (paras. 9 and 10) introduces incentives to extend the use of plea 

bargains, immediate proceeding and abbreviated proceedings. 

104  Law No. 134 of 27 September 2021, Art. 1 (paras. 5 and 8) establishes general use of electronic notification 
with the aim at speeding up the procedures and the possibility to hold remote hearings with the agreement of 
the parties. 

105  Written contribution from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit pp. 13-14. 

12 

 
                                                 
the judge at the stage of the preliminary investigation, decreasing the number of cases at trial 
level106,  introducing  a  selective  access  at  appeal  level107  and  new  criteria108  which  would 
allow to drop a case before trial. The reform seeks to harmonise performances across courts 
through a monitoring system and incentives to accomplish standard performance109. Together 
with  staff  recruitment  (Office  for  the  Trial)  and  increased  digitalisation,  implementing 
legislation, due by late 2022, is important in order to reach final targets of the RRP110. On 28 
October 2021, the Minister of Justice established five working groups to draft implementing 
legislation  by  30  April  2022,  and  by  15  May  2022  for  restorative  justice111.  On  14  April 
2022, the Minister of Justice established an additional working group to draft implementing 
legislation by 20 June 2022 for criminal digital trial and office for the trail112.  

II. 

ANTI-CORRUPTION FRAMEWORK  

The  National  Anti-Corruption  Authority  is  the  main  entity  in  charge  of  the  prevention  of 
corruption within the public administration sector, coordinating the National Anti-Corruption 
Plan  and  supervising  the  adoption  of  the  local  three-year  anti-corruption  action  plans.  The 
Anti-Corruption  Unit  of  the  Financial  Police  is  responsible  for  the  investigation  and 
prevention of corruption as a specialised law enforcement body. As an independent authority 
at  the  Bank  of  Italy,  the  Financial  Intelligence  Unit  provides  support  to  the  competent 
prosecutor’s  office  and  cooperates  with  the  Financial  Police  as  the  competent  authority  for 
receiving reports of suspicious financial transactions. To prevent and fight corruption in the 
allocation and implementation process of resources received under the RRP, consultative and 
control tasks have also been assigned to the Court of Auditors113. 

The perception among experts and business executives is that the level of corruption in 
the  public  sector  remains  relatively  high.  In  the  2021  Corruption  Perceptions  Index  by 
Transparency  International,  Italy  scores  56/100  and  ranks  13th  in  the  European  Union  and 
42nd  globally114.  The  perception  has  significantly  increased  over  the  past  five  years115.  The 

106  By increasing the cases in which it is a decision of the victim to start a criminal proceeding; by broadening 
the possibility to consider the particular tenuousness of the fact so that the trail will not start; by extending 
the possibility of extinguishing certain types of crime through remedial conducts (written contribution from 
the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit; website of the Chamber of Deputies, Study “the 
content of the reform approved by parliament”).  

107  Written contribution from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit, p. 15.  
108  Law No. 134 of 27 September 2021, Art. 1 (paragraphs 9 and 12) introduces a new rule of decision: if there 
is no ‘reasonable expectation of conviction’, dismissal of cases during preliminary investigation phase or at 
preliminary hearing before the trial may occur (previously, the rule of decision to start the trial phased was 
the existence of elements which would allow the prosecution, without any reference to expected conviction). 
109  Managerial trainings for the judiciary are part of the Memorandum of Understanding signed on 22 December 
2021  by  the  Ministry  of  Justice,  the  CSM  and  the  High  School  for  the  Judiciary  (i.e.  training  courses  for 
magistrates  in  managerial  positions  in  order  to  strengthen  the  managerial  and  digital  skills  for  Head  and 
Deputy of Judicial Offices). 

110  2022 Report of the First President at the High Court of Cassation, synthesis, p. 7. 
111  Decree of the Ministry of Justice dated 28 October 2021. Written contribution from the Ministry of Justice 
(Legislative Office) in the context of the country visit, p. 13. The Ministry of Justice informed that there is 
no prolongation of the working groups, but there is no public draft legislation yet. 

112  Decree  of  the  Ministry  of  Justice  dated  14  April  2022.  The  Ministry  of  Justice  informed  that  there  is  no 

prolongation of the working groups, but there is no public draft legislation yet. 

113  Art. 46 of Law No. 238 of 23 December 2021. 
114  Transparency International (2022), Corruption Perceptions Index 2021. The level of perceived corruption is 
categorised  as  follows:  low  (the  perception  among  experts  and  business  executives  of  public  sector 
corruption scores above 79); relatively low (scores between 79-60), relatively high (scores between 59-50), 
high (scores below 50).  

13 

 
                                                 
2022  Special  Eurobarometer  on  Corruption  shows  that  89%  of  respondents  consider 
corruption  widespread  in  their  country  (EU  average  68  %)  and  32  %  of  respondents  feel 
personally  affected  by  corruption  in  their  daily  lives  (EU  average  24  %)116.  As  regards 
businesses, 91 % of companies consider that corruption is widespread (EU average 63 %) and 
41 % consider that that corruption is a problem when doing business (EU average 34 %)117. 
Furthermore, 39 % of respondents find that there are enough successful prosecutions to deter 
people  from  corrupt  practices  (EU  average  34  %)118,  while  29%  of  companies  believe  that 
people  and  businesses  caught  for  bribing  a  senior  official  are  appropriately  punished  (EU 
average 29 %)119.  

A new National Anti-Corruption Plan (2022-2024) is planned to be in place by the end 
of  the  summer.  The  new  National  Anti-Corruption  Plan,  which  is  based  on  the  main 
corruption  prevention  law120,  is  Italy’s  overarching  strategy  for  corruption  prevention.  The 
finalisation  of  the  new  Plan121  was  deliberately  delayed  to  2022  to  align  it  with  the  new 
Decree122 creating an ‘integrated plan’ to  coordinate anti-corruption prevention  measures in 
line with  the  Italian RRP. The new plan sets  out  the main policy objectives for a period of 
three years, to be updated every year123. The central theme for the new Plan is the use of the 
funds related to the RRP with a focus on public procurement and anti-corruption measures124. 
It also provides overall support to the public administration in the design and implementation 
of entity-specific three-year action plans125. According to a 2021 evaluation of the National 

115  In 2017, the score was 50, while, in 2021, the score is 56. The score significantly increases/decreases when it 
changes more than five points; improves/deteriorates (changes between 4-5 points), and is relatively stable 
(changes from 1-3 points) in the last five years. 

116  Special  Eurobarometer  523  on  Corruption  (2022).  The  Eurobarometer  data  on  citizens’  corruption 
perception and experience is updated every second year. The previous data set is the Special Eurobarometer 
502 (2020). 

117  Flash Eurobarometer 507 on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU (2022). The Eurobarometer 
data on business attitudes towards corruption as is updated every second year. The previous data set is the 
Flash Eurobarometer 482 (2019). 

118  Special Eurobarometer 523 on Corruption (2022).  
119  Flash Eurobarometer 507 on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU (2022).  
120  Law  No.  190  of  6  November  2012,  Prevention  and  repression  of  corruption  in  public  administrations, 

Official Gazette of the Italian Republic, General Series No. 265 of 13 November 2012. 

121  The  National  Anti-Corruption  Plan  was  established  as  the  main  anti-corruption  law  by  Law  No.  190  of  6 
November 2012, Prevention and repression of corruption in public administrations, Official Gazette of the 
Italian  Republic,  General  Series  No.  265  of  13  November  2012. The  last  plan  covered  2019-2021,  Italian 
Anti-Corruption Authority, National Anti-Corruption Plan, Resolution No. 1064, 13 November 2019. 

122  The  Government  has  adopted  Decree  No.  80  of  9  June  2021  on  urgent  measures  to  strengthen  the 
administrative capacity of public administrations  with the functions to implement the RRP, introducing an 
‘Integrated  Plan  of  Activities  and  Organisation’  (IPAO)  to  coordinate  prevention  measures  relating  to 
performance and results with the overall goal of simplification and digitalisation. 
123  2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, p. 9. 
124  Information received by the National Anti-Corruption Authority in the context of the country visit to Italy. 
125  Each  ministry,  local  government  and  municipality  design  and  implement  their  own  local  plans.  Among 
others, such plans aim at establishing rules for the appointment of a corruption prevention officer; specifying 
the  public  entities’  role  in  evaluating  and  managing  corruption  risks,  enhancing  transparency,  supporting 
whistleblowers, and in the monitoring of privatisation procedures. The plan also sets up rules on the drafting 
of  three-year  anti-corruption  plans  in  the  areas  most  exposed  to  corruption,  such  as  healthcare.  In  this 
context, see three-year plan of the Ministry of Interior 2021-2023, as a sample, written contribution received 
by the Ministry of Interior in the context of the country visit to Italy.  

14 

 
                                                                                                                                                        
Anti-Corruption  Authority,  the  implementation  of  the  entity-specific  plans  of  2019  was 
satisfactory126. 

Italy  is  committed  to  proactively  monitor  the  impact  of  the  criminal  justice  reform 
concerning corruption cases closed at appeal level without a verdict. The criminal justice 
reform was adopted in September 2021127. It aims at reducing the excessive disposition times 
that  have  been  found  to  hamper,  among  others,  Italy’s  efforts  to  effectively  prosecute  and 
adjudicate  corruption  cases,  jeopardising  the  right  to  a  speedy  trial  and  to  good 
administration128. The governing coalition found a compromise by suspending the limitation 
periods for first  instance trial,  including for proceedings concerning corruption, and instead 
set  time  limits  on  subsequent  appeals.  At  the  appeal  level,  corruption  proceedings  are 
amongst those which would automatically close after a lapse of time of two years129, unless 
the judge requests an extension. The effectiveness of the reform will therefore require close 
monitoring  with  regard  to  the  fight  against  corruption,  particularly  at  the  appeal  level  that 
Italy committed to undertake from the entry into force of the law130. A referendum held on 12 
June  2022  on  the  abolishment  of  the  ‘Severino  law’  prohibiting  individuals  convicted  of 
serious crimes, including corruption, to run as candidates in European, national and regional 
elections for a period of six years did not pass131. 

Cooperation between the relevant entities fighting corruption continues to work well132, 
however, challenges remain as regard corruption vulnerabilities in public funds as well 
as  the  capacity  to  effectively  prosecute  foreign  bribery133.  Overall,  coordination  and 
cooperation between the prosecution services, the Financial Police, the Financial Intelligence 
Unit,  the  Prosecutor’s  Office  at  the  Court  of  Auditors,  the  National  Anti-Mafia  Directorate 
and  the  Anti-Corruption  Authority  remains  effective,  including  for  high-level  corruption 
cases,  with  increasingly  effective  information  exchanges  between  them134.  In  practice, 
challenges remain for investigators, in particular regarding the level of interconnection of the 
registries  of  the  various  entities  that  hold  financial  information  of  relevance  to  the  fight 

126  According to information received by the National Anti-Corruption Authority in the context of the country 
visit  to  Italy,  the  analysis  showed  that  most  public  administrations  operate  in  line  with  the  National  Anti-
Corruption  Authority’s  indicators  on  corruption  mapping,  anti-corruption  processes,  corruption  risk 
analyses, the provision of trainings and anti-corruption recommendations. Some challenges were identified, 
including  the  local  monitoring  of  the  implementation  of  the  entity-specific  anti-corruption  plans  and  with 
regards to small public entities. The National Anti-Corruption Authority is in the process of developing new 
indicators on simplification measures specifically for such small public administrations. 

127  The  justice  reform  responds  to  recommendations  made  under  the  European  Semester;  see  the  Council 
Recommendation  of  9  July  2019  on  the  2019  National  Reform  Programme  of  Italy,  Country  specific 
recommendation 4, p. 11, and Recommendation for a Council Recommendation, Recital 27. 

128  2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, p. 11. 
129  Permitting time to clear the COVID-19 related case backlog, the reform will fully enter into force in 2025. 
130  European Semester, 2022 Country report on Italy. See in this context also section I. 
131  The referendum did not reach the necessary quorum and was therefore invalidated. The results of the 2022 
referendum are available at the website of the Ministry of Interior (12 June 2022). The Constitutional Court 
approved five justice referenda, Decisions No. 56-60 of 16 February 2022. 

132  2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, p. 10. 
133  Information received by the Prosecution Service at the High Court of Cassation in the context of the country 

visit to Italy. 

134  Information  received  by  the  Prosecutor’s  Office  at  the  Court  of  Auditors,  Financial  Police/National  Anti-
Mafia Directorate/Anti-Corruption Authority in the context of the country visit to Italy. As reported in 2021 
Rule  of  Law  Report,  Country  Chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in  Italy,  p.  10,  the  cooperation  with 
customs and monopoly agencies is considered useful to uncover corruption in the larger context of organised 
crime infiltrating the economy and the public administration. 

15 

 
                                                 
against corruption135. Investigators consider that they could benefit from further digitalisation 
and  the  use  of  artificial  intelligence  to  enhance  and  speed-up  the  identification  of  suspects 
and  the  evidence-gathering,  including  in  high-level  corruption  cases136.  Areas  where  most 
cases  of  corruption  occur  remain  the  public  administration  and  public  tendering,  with 
increasing  vulnerabilities  in  the  renewable  energy  and  construction  sectors137.  Despite 
important  legislative developments138, lack of resources, limited experience and insufficient 
legal expertise continue to undermine the capacity of law enforcement authorities to pursue 
and  prosecute  foreign  bribery  effectively139.  As  a  major  exporter,  Italy  had  dropped  from 
active to moderate enforcement regarding foreign bribery140, although attention to this form 
of crime has significantly increased compared to ten years ago141. 

Concerns  exist  as  to  the  legislative  proposal  on  conflicts  of  interest  for  political  office 
holders,  including  parliamentarians,  which  remains  pending  in  Parliament  for  several 
years.  The  proposal142  includes  a  definition  of  conflicts  of  interest  and  the  introduction  of 
stricter integrity measures for members of national, regional and local government offices143. 
Until the new law is adopted and enters into force, legislation on conflicts of interest remains 
fragmented144. A Code of Conduct for Ethics has not been adopted145. Similarly, no further 
developments have taken place with regard to the mandatory publication of asset declarations 

135  Information received by  the Financial Police/National Anti-Mafia Directorate in the context of the country 

visit to Italy.  

136  Written contribution received by the Guardia di Finanza in the context of the country visit to Italy, p. 1. 
137  Information  received  by  the  Prosecutor’s  Office  at  the  Court  of  Auditors,  Financial  Police/National  Anti-
Mafia  Directorate/Anti-Corruption  Authority  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  to  Italy.  See  also  written 
contribution received by the Court of Auditors in the context of the country visit to Italy, p. 2.  

138  In 2019, new legislation extended prescription periods and increased sanctions for bribery. Cf. also OECD, 
Statement  of  the  OECD  Working  Group  on  Bribery  on  Italy’s  implementation  of  the  Anti-Bribery 
Convention (2017).  

139  2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, p. 10.  
140  Italy opened 23 investigations, launched nine cases and concluded four foreign bribery cases with sanctions. 
Transparency International (2020), Exporting Corruption, p. 73. For data between 1999-2020: OECD, 2020 
Enforcement of the Anti-Bribery Convention, Investigations, proceedings, and sanctions (2021), p. 3.  

141  Information received by the Prosecution Service at the High Court of Cassation in the context of the country 

visit to Italy; 2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, p. 11. 

142  2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, pp. 11-12; and 2020 Rule of 
Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, p. 11. The legislative proposal No. 1461, 
Macina and others, Legislative Proposal of interest (2018) presented in May 2019 would amend and replace 
almost entirely the provisions of Law No. 215/2004 on Conflicts of Interest. Input from Italy for the 2021 
Rule  of  Law  Report,  p.  30.  It  was  approved  by  the  Constitutional  Affairs  Committee  of  the  Chamber  of 
Deputies in October 2020. The entry into force was planned for 1 July 2021. 

143  The  proposal provides for additional cases of ineligibility  for the office  of deputy  senator and senator and 
regional councillor. It includes new rules on the ineligibility of magistrates and provisions on the regulatory 
regime to be applied to magistrates who are candidates in the elections (see also section I). It delegates the 
Government  to  define  a  more  stringent  discipline  for  the  prevention  of  conflicts  of  interest  in  the  public 
administration,  entrusting  the  Anti-Corruption  Authority  with  specific  powers  to  intervene  and  to  impose 
sanctions, providing for greater forms of transparency with respect to the current regulatory framework. The 
proposal enlarges the provisions on non-transferability of offices (currently governed by Legislative Decree 
no. 39/2013), and limits the possibility of accumulating roles in administrative and control bodies in publicly 
controlled  companies  and  the  extension  of  the  subjective  scope  of  the  rules  on  conflicts  of  interest.  Cf. 
GRECO Fourth Evaluation Round - Second Compliance Report, paras. 15-19. 

144  2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, p. 11, and 2021 Rule of Law 

Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, pp. 11-12. 

145  GRECO Fourth Evaluation Round - Second Compliance Report, paras. 10-11, recommending also to further 

develop the range of non-criminal sanctions for unethical behaviour. 

16 

 
                                                 
for members of the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate, which remains fragmented and non-
transparent146.  

A new lobbying law passed the lower house of Parliament. In January 2022, the Chamber 
of  Deputies  approved  one  of  the  draft  legislative  proposals  on  lobbying  presented  in  the 
course  of  2018  and  2019147.  The  draft  law  proposes  the  establishment  of  an  electronic, 
mandatory register of interest representatives. Concerns have been raised with regard to the 
limited scope proposed, exempting business associations, trade unions and religious entities 
from the obligation to register despite their relevance in representing interests in the decision-
making  process148.  Further,  the  one  year  cooling-off  period  for  former  members  of  the 
national  and  regional  governments  following  the  termination  of  their  activities  to  prevent 
‘revolving doors’149 does not extend to former members of Parliament150. The introduction of 
a  ‘legislative  footprint’  would  enhance  transparency  as  to  who  seeks  to  influence  specific 
pieces of legislation. The approval of the draft law by the Senate is planned for the beginning 
of  2023.  Until  an  operational  lobby  register,  including  a  ‘legislative  footprint’,  is  set  up, 
regulation of lobbying vis-à-vis the government will remain fragmented151.  

Risks of corruption in political party financing raise public attention. 2022 saw several 
corruption cases under investigation, prosecution, and adjudication for violation of the law on 
political parties’ public funding152, including high-ranking political figures153. In this context, 
the  practice  of  channelling  donations  through  political  foundations  and  associations  before 
they  are  transferred  to  political  parties  present  an  obstacle  to  public  accountability,  as  such 
transactions  are  difficult  to  trace  and  monitor154.  Italy  prohibits  direct  public  funding  to 

146  This refers also to members of the Government and senior civil servants, see for more details the 2020 Rule 
of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, p. 11 and 2021 Rule of Law Report, 
Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, p. 12. This is despite Italy’s open data commitment in 
the  G20  context;  see  also  G20  Anti-Corruption  Open  Data  Principles  (2015),  Transparency  International, 
Connecting the dots: Building the case for open data to fight corruption. 

147  Chamber  of  Deputies,  Act  No.  196-721-1827-A,  Legislative  Proposal  No.  196  by  Fregolent,  Discipline  of 
the  activity  of  representation  of  special  interests  and  establishment  of  the  public  register  of  interest 
representatives  (196),  as  presented  on  23  March  2018  and  approved  on  12  January  2022  by  the  lower 
chamber, currently pending before the Senate. Other proposals concern Proposal No. n. 721 by Madia, Rules 
on  the  transparency  of  relations  between  the  representatives  of  special  interests  and  members  of  the 
Government and the leaders of the state administrations; and Proposal No. n. 1827 by Silvestri, Discipline of 
the activity of institutional relations for the representation of interests. 

148  TheGoodLobby (2022), Lobbying law has been approved and is welcomed, although with shortcomings. 
149  This ban extends to external experts working for public administrations for the duration of their contract. 
150  According to information received from TheGoodLobby in the context of the country visit to Italy, previous 
drafts had included a cooling-off period for all decision-makers moving to public affairs, which would have 
included  relevant  actors,  such  as  the  former  chairs  of  parliamentary  committees.  For  more  details,  see 
TheGoodLobby (2022), Lobbying law has been approved and is welcomed, although with shortcomings. 
151  Decision No. 208/2017 only regulates activities of the Chamber of Deputies, not of the Senate. Across the 
national  territory,  the  situation  remains  fragmented  with  no  national  register  for  the  government.  Some 
regions  and  municipalities  have  taken  positive  steps  forward  and  implemented  regulation  (e.g.  Milan  and 
Rome  publish  meetings  between  stakeholders  and  public  decision-makers  online  for  some  of  their 
departments)  but  there  is  no  systematic  or  standardised  approach.  GRECO,  Fourth  Evaluation  Round, 
Second Compliance Report, paras. 30-37. 

152  Law No. 3/2019. 
153  See ANSA (2022), Giulio Centemero got a suspended sentence to eight months for illicit financing; Politico 

(2022), Italy’s Matteo Renzi charged with illegal party financing. 

154  As already reported last year, in 2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in 
Italy, p. 13, this practice has  reportedly raised the attention of investigators and prosecutors already at  the 
outset of 2020. Donations made to third-party associations accounted for nearly EUR 10 million, or 37 per 

17 

 
                                                 
 
political  parties, including for political  campaigns155. Political  parties are therefore required 
to finance themselves almost exclusively through private donations from individual donors or 
legal  entities156.  This  is  seen  as  one  reason  why  members  of  Parliament  often  rely  on  their 
own resources to fund political campaigns, making political actors more dependent on private 
donations  and  more  vulnerable  to  undue  influence157.  There  is  a  relatively  high  ceiling  for 
direct  private  donations  at  EUR  100 000  per  year158.  The  rules  on  the  transparency  of 
financing  to  political  organisations  in  force  since  2019  oblige  parties  to  publish  data  on 
donations159. Donations over EUR 500, received in money or in-kind, need to be published 
along  with  the  donor’s  identity  within  one  month  from  the  date  of  reception.  Failure  to 
comply with the publication requirement is subject to an administrative fine of three to five 
times  the  value  of  the  non-reported  donation.  Foreign  donations  are  banned.  However, 
publicly available information is stored in different formats and not evenly structured, which 
limits possibilites of public monitoring impacting on accountability160. A centralised, single, 
machine-readable register is not in place, which would help to ensure that such political party 
and campaign finance information is made available in a coherent, understandable and timely 
manner161.  Concerns  also  exist  as  to  the  capacities  and  resources  of  the  oversight  and 
supervisory bodies162.  

Amendments to the whistleblower law remain to be adopted163 but were already at the 
final legislative stage at the time of the 2021 report164. Due to the time that lapsed during 

cent  of  the  total  volume  of  political  funding  in  2019.  Transparency  International  (2020),  Debugging 
Democracy, Open data for political integrity in Europe, pp. 4 and 19-20. 

155  The  law  abrogating  public  funding  was  amended  following  referenda  on  political  party  financing  in  1993 
and 1997.  In 2014 legislation  was passed to phase out the  state  financing of political parties (Decree Law 
No. 149/2013, converted into Law No. 13/2014), with changes gradually introduced between 2014 and 2017. 
156  Following  a  referendum  in  1993  and  the  subsequent  measures  adopted  from  1993  to  2013,  direct  public 

funding to political parties was banned. 

157  Data  published  by  the  Chamber  of  Deputies,  who  mapped  donations  during  the  period  of  February  to 
November 2019, indicates that 72.7% of funds allocated to Italian parties came from members of Parliament, 
22.9% from physical persons and 4.9% from private companies. See also Transparency International (2020), 
‘Money and politics: what do the data tell us?’.  

158  For  indirect  contributions,  Law  No.  13/2014  maintained  the  option  for  natural  persons  to  devolve  a 
compulsory 0.2 per cent of their annual income tax to political parties, after taxpayer contributions had first 
been introduced as a source of financing for political parties in 1997 (Law No. 2/1997). 

159  Law No. 3/2019.  
160  In December 2021, the Italian newspaper ‘L’Espresso’ published data on donations made to political parties 
from  August  2020  to  October  2021,  illustrating  that  political  parties  had  received  EUR  47  million  from 
private  entities  and  individual  donors,  with  400  enterprises  and  entrepreneurs  from  the  construction  and 
healthcare sector as well as private universities. 

161  GRECO  Third  Evaluation  Round  -  Second  Addendum  to  the  Second  Compliance  Report,  para.  37, 
recommending  to  introduce  a  coordinated  approach  for  the  publication  of  information  on  the  financing  of 
political parties and election campaigns, and to ensure that such information is made available in a coherent, 
understandable and timely manner.  

162  Transparency  International-Italia  (2021),  TheGoodLobby,  Black  Lobby:  Proposals  on  Financing  Politics. 
Information  also  received  by  Libera  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  to  Italy  highlighting  that  de  facto 
control  is  exercised  primarily  by  the  prosecution  service  due  to  the  limited  resources  of  oversight 
committees. Oversight bodies include: Committee for the Transparency and Control of Financial Statements 
of Parties and Political Movements, Court of Audit, Regional Electoral Guarantee Board. 

163  Amendments were approved in a second reading on 31 March 2021 and sent to the senate for final approval. 
The  amendments  are  due  to  the  transposition  of  the  relating  EU  Directive  on  the  subject-matter.  Italy’s 
legislative framework on whistleblowing comprises the Law of 30 November 2017, No. 179 and Legislative 
Decree of 8 June 2001, No. 231. 

164  2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, p. 11. 

18 

 
                                                                                                                                                        
the process, only the adoption of a new enabling law165 is necessary for the Government to 
further  revise  Italy’s  stand-alone  whistleblower  law166.  The  enabling  law  was  also  already 
approved  by  the  Chamber  of  Deputies  on  16  December  2021  and  is  now  requiring  the 
approval  by  the  Senate.  Once  in  force,  the  Government  has  3  months  to  implement  and 
follow up on the delegation167. Until adoption, the protection of whistleblowers in the private 
sector  remains  limited  as  it  is  based  on  voluntary  compliance  programmes  that  not  all 
companies  have  instituted168.  In  practice,  the  Anti-Corruption  Authority  does  not  have  the 
mandate  to  receive  whistleblower  disclosures  from  private  sector  employees  or  to  issue 
sanctions169.  The  extension  of  the  scope  of  application  to  all  companies  with  more  than  50 
workers  will  therefore  be  an  important  new  level  of  protection  for  private  sector 
whistleblowers170. 

COVID-19  pandemic  related  corruption  risks  remain  high,  while  corruption  is 
increasingly used to infiltrate Italy’s legal economy. Heightened risks during the COVID-
19 pandemic171 have in the course of 2021 turned into increased occurrence of corruption and 
corruption-related crimes172 with attempts by organised crime to infiltrate the legal economy 
presenting  one  of  the  main  challenges  in  Italy’s  fight  against  corruption173.  According  to 
investigators,  criminal  networks  have  benefitted  in  particular  from  the  pandemic-related 
needs of economically fragile SMEs and the procurement of state aid and public grants, with 

165  An  enabling  law/legislative  delegation  is  necessary  to  mandate  the  Government  to  begin  implementation. 
The  new  enabling  law  is  included  in  the  draft  European  delegation  law  2021  within  the  Senate  Act.  The 
previous  legislative  delegation  to  transpose  the  EU  Whistleblower  Directive  into  Italian  law  expired  in 
August 2021. See enabling law No. 53 of 22 April 2021, Delegation to the Government for the transposition 
of  European  Directives  and  the  implementation  of  other  European  Union  acts  -  European  enabling  Law 
2019-2020, Official Gazette of the Italian Republic No. 49 of 23 April 2021. 

166  Law No. 179/2017. 
167  Chamber of Deputies (2022), Stenographic report of the Assembly Session No. 639, where the Ministry of 
Justice responded to questions in relation to the status of the transposition of the Directive on the Protection 
of Persons who Report Breaches of Union Law, Directive(EU) 2019/1937. 

168  With the adoption of Law No. 179/2017, the whistleblowing regulation, which is generally applicable to the 
private sector, came into force on in December 2018. The protection scheme for whistleblowers provided by 
the  law  is  voluntary  and  applicable  only  to  those  companies  where  the  employer  has  adopted  an 
organisational  model  for  crime  prevention  pursuant  to  Decree  No.  231/2001  relating  to  corporate  criminal 
liability. The law requires only from those companies that have the Decree 231 model in place to set up a 
whistleblower reporting system for the protection of whistleblowers.  

169  In turn, and as reported in the 2020 Rule of Law report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, 
p.  11,  public  sector  reports  to  the  Anti-Corruption  Authority  have  significantly  increased  following  the 
revision of the legal framework in 2017. In June 2021, the Anti-Corruption Authority had also issued a new 
set  of  guidelines  on  whistleblowing.  According  to  the  Italian  authorities,  this  set  of  guidelines  takes  into 
account the principles of the Directive (EU) 2019/1937. 

170  2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, p. 11. 
171  2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, pp. 13-14. 
172  This  includes  the  crime  of  abuse  of  office  and  fraud,  according  to  information  received  by  the  Financial 

Police/National Bar Association in the context of the country visit to Italy. 

173  Written contribution received by the Ministry of Interior/DCA in the context of the country visit, p. 2. See 
also  Report of the Minister of the Interior to the Parliament (2022), Activities and results achieved by the 
Antimafia Investigation Directorate in January-June 2021, p. 61, reporting in some parts a recorded increase 
of 8% of crimes against the public administration, reaching a peak of 32% for corruption offences. See also 
2021  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Country  Chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in  Italy,  pp.  13-14,  reporting  that 
criminals  have  benefitted  in  2020  in  particular  from  purchases  of  small  private  enterprises  in  economic 
difficulties  due  to  the  COVID-19  pandemic  and  of  sanitary  products,  including  face  masks,  protective 
equipment and medical gadgets, which can serve as a means to facilitate other corruption-related crime. 

19 

 
                                                 
money  being  misused  for  other  purposes  and  not  being  recovered174.  Concerns  exist  of 
similar trends with  regard to  the future procurements  of public funds of the RRP due to its 
size175. To significantly revise the Public Contracts Code176 and simplify the large amount of 
secondary implementing sources177, a draft single regulation is currently under discussion in 
Parliament with an indicative timeline of adoption in the summer of 2022178.  

III.  MEDIA PLURALISM AND MEDIA FREEDOM 

Freedom  of  expression  and  information,  press  freedom  as  well  as  the  principle  of 
transparency of media financing are enshrined in the Italian Constitution179. A Press Law180 
regulates the written press while the Italian Audiovisual Media Law181, regulates audiovisual 
communications  and  establishes  the  independent  media  regulator,  the  Authority  for 
Guaranteeing Communications (AGCOM) and the legal framework for the managament and 
monitoring  of  Italian  public  service  media.  Italy’s  Freedom  of  Information  Act  regulates 
‘civic  access’  to  data  and  documents  held  by  the  public  administration182.  A  specialised 
Coordination Centre monitors acts of intimidation against journalists183.  

The  regulator  for  audiovisual  media  services  continues  to  function  independently  and 
effectively184,  including  in  its  monitoring  of  public  bodies’  advertising  expenditure.  By 
virtue  of  a  specific  provision  of  Legislative  Decree  no.  208/2021185,  all  Italian  public 
administrative  bodies  that  purchase  advertising  space  in  mass  media  outlets  are  obliged  to 
inform AGCOM about their advertising expenditures for the previous financial year. The law 
establishes a set of criteria which determine how such expenditure shall be spent, namely that 

174  Information received by the National Anti-Mafia Directorate in the context of the country visit to Italy and 
written  contribution  by  the  Ministry  of  Interior/DCA  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  to  Italy,  p.  2, 
reporting that organised crime has, in the first phase in the pandemic, created an ‘alternative welfare’ to the 
slower and more cumbersome pandemic support offered by the State, to strengthen its territorial control over 
enterprises  in  rural  areas  and  to  enhance  social  credit.  In  a  second  phase,  organised  crime  networks  have 
positioned  themselves  as  interlocutors  of  SMEs  in  economic  difficulty  also  in  Central  and  Northern  Italy 
through  the  provision  of  low-interest  loans.  Where  criminal  organisations  already  enjoyed  stability  and 
economic and social credit, organised crime  has  been directly approached by the  vulnerable, because they 
are  recognised.  In  territories,  where  a  direct  rapprochement  would  not  have  had  any  effect,  criminal 
organisations  have  made  use  of  ‘hinge’  men,  intermediaries,  such  as  lawyers  and  accountants,  exploiting 
their professional channels to obtain information on fragile subjects or companies or to use their skills. 

175  Information received by Court of Auditors/Prosecutor’s Office at the Court of Auditors in the context of the 
country  visit  to  Italy.  See  also  written  contribution  by  the  Ministry  of  Interior  National  Anti-Mafia 
Directorate in the context of the country visit to Italy, p. 4. 

176  From  the  pre-pandemic  period,  there  is  the  Leg.  Decree  no.  50/2016  in  place,  as  amended  by  Legislative 
Decree no. 56/2017 (‘Corrective Decree’), Law no. 96/2017 and Law no. 55/2019 (‘Sblocca Cantieri Law’). 
177  A  number  of  emergency  measures  have  been  adopted  by  the  Government  to  support  economic  operators 
most affected by the COVID-19 pandemic with another set of amendments of the Public Contracts Code by 
a number of law decrees, including Law Decree no. 76/2020, as converted with amendments into Law no. 
120/2020 (‘Semplificazioni Decree’) and Law Decree no. 77/2021 as converted with amendments into Law 
no. 108/2021 (‘Semplificazioni-bis Decree’), which now form the Public Contracts Code. In addition, there 
is a large amount of guidelines issued by the National Anti-Corruption Authority. 

178  Information received by the National Anti-Corruption Authority in the context of the country visit to Italy. 
179  Constitution of Italy, Art. 21.  
180  Law n. 47 of 8 February 1948 on the press.  
181  Amended in 2021 to transpose the AVMS Directive (EU) 2018/1808.  
182  Leg. Decree 97/2016. 
183  Italy ranks 58th in the 2022 Reporters without Borders World Press Freedom Index compared to 41st in the 

previous year. 

184  2020 and 2021 Rule of Law Reports, Country Chapters on the rule of law situation in Italy.  
185  Art. 49. of Leg. Decree no. 208/2021. 

20 

 
                                                 
at  least  15%  shall  be  spent  on  advertisements  broadcast  on  private  local  television  stations 
and local radio stations operating in the territories of the EU Member States and that at least 
50% of such expenditure shall be spent on advertisements published in daily newspapers and 
magazines. AGCOM may levy fines of up to EUR 5 200 on such public authorities if they do 
not adhere to these obligations. The MPM 2022 concludes, once more, that the independence 
of the media regulator presents low risk given that ‘the appointments procedures and the rules 
on budgetary independence of the authority are designed to minimise the risk of political or 
economic  interference’186.  With  regard  to  the  disbursement  of  state  advertising,  the  MPM 
2022 maintains its low risk evaluation given that Italy possesses elaborate legislation on state 
advertising  while  pointing  out,  however,  that  ‘such  rules  are  limited  to  the  public 
administration and do not extend to the publicly owned companies’187.  

Public service media in Italy is regulated by means of a multilayered monitoring system. 
The  key  legislative  provisions  are  enshrined  in  Legislative  Decree  no.  208/2021188  which 
establishes  the  precise  services  which  public  service  media  shall  guarantee189.  The  law 
stipulates that the concession of public radio, television and multimedia service is granted by 
the  state  for  periods  of  10  years  following  a  public  consultation  relating  to  public  service 
obligations.  In  practice  this  concession  is  granted  and  renewed  in  favour  of  one  company, 
RAI-Radiotelevisione italiana S.p.a. RAI’s Board of Directors, made up of seven members190 
and elected for a three-year period renewable once, carries out administrative functions and 
ensures that the aims and obligations of the general public service broadcasting are fulfilled. 
Two members are elected by the Chamber of Deputies, by the Senate and by the Council of 
Ministers  respectively,  on  a  proposal  by  the  Minister  of  Economy  and  Finance191.  Another 
member is appointed from among the employees of the company itself. The Board appoints 
its  chairperson  but  such  appointment  is  dependent  on  the  assent  of  the  Parliamentary 
Committee for the General Guidelines and Supervision of Broadcasting Services192, to which 
the Board shall report every six months prior to the approval of its financial statements. This 
Parliamentary  Committee  typically  addresses  hundreds  of  questions  per  year,  relating  to 
RAI’s  compliance  with  its  public  service  function,  to  RAI’s  Board  of  Directors.  RAI  is 
financed  by  means  of  an  annual  fee,  established  and  adjusted  by  the  Ministry  of  Economy 
and  Finance,  levied  on  subscribers  to  the  service,  as  well  as  by  means  of  advertising 

186  2022 Media Pluralism Monitor, p. 13. 
187  Ibid. p. 20.  
188  Title VIII. 
189  Art.  59(2)(d)  thereof  specifically  stipulates  that  access  to  public  service  media  airtime  shall  be  ensured, 
according to the modalities established by law, for, among others, political parties and groups represented in 
parliament and in regional councils, national unions, religions and political movements who have a sufficient 
degree of representation. Italy is, furthermore, endowed with a legislative framework law, namely Legge 22 
febbraio  2000,  n.  28  Disposizioni  per  la  parita'  di accesso  ai  mezzi  di  informazione  durante  le  campagne 
elettorali e referendarie e per la comunicazione politica, which establishes detailed rules governing access 
to  mass  media  for  political  communication  by  all  political  groups  with  a  view  to  guaranteeing  equal 
treatment and impartiality throughout the year as well as, specifically, during electoral campaigns.  

190  Persons  having  the  prerequisites  for  appointment  as  constitutional  judges  pursuant  to  Art.  135(2)  of  the 
Constitution or, in any case, persons of recognised good reputation, prestige, and professional competence 
and well-known independence of conduct, who have distinguished themselves in economic, scientific, legal, 
humanistic cultural, or social  communication activities, gaining  significant  managerial experience,  may be 
appointed  as  members  of  the  board  of  directors.  The  board  members  must  be  of  good  repute,  have  no 
conflicts of interest and may not hold positions in competitor companies. 

191  Nominations are made following a public selection process where any individual may submit a candidature.  
192  Based  on  Art.  2  of  Regulation  of  13  November  1975,  the  Committee  is  composed  of  20  deputies  and  20 
senators  appointed  by  the  Presidents  of  the  two  Houses,  on  the  basis  of  nominations  made  by  the 
parliamentary groups in such a way as to ensure proportional representation therein. 

21 

 
                                                 
revenues. The media regulator, AGCOM, monitors the respect by RAI of those audiovisual 
content rules under AGCOM’s control193. The MPM 2022 considers that this remains a high 
risk area given that the reforms along the years have failed to substantially shelter the public 
service media board of directors from political influence and that the amount of the revenue 
devolved to public service media is determined on a yearly basis by the government via the 
Budget Law.194.  

The laws on defamation have not been amended and remain a key area of concern for 
journalists  and  organisations  representing  them.  As  reported  in  the  2021  Rule  of  Law 
Report195, the Constitutional Court held that Article 13 of the Press Law - as far as it provides 
for the penalty of imprisonment for press defamation  - is unconstitutional and incompatible 
with Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights196. However, there have been 
no  amendments  to  the  Italian  laws  regulating  libel,  either  civil  or  criminal.  Several  libel 
cases,  often  entailing  lengthy  proceedings,  have  an  effect  akin  to  local  strategic  lawsuits 
against  public  participation  (SLAPPs)197.  The  MPM  2022  points  out  that  following  the 
aforementioned  Constitutional  Court  ruling,  the  prison  sentence  for  defamation  has 
practically been abolished in Italy. It however highlights the increasing prevalence of SLAPP 
cases and concludes that ‘the combination of criminal and civil defamation can be used with 
a  chilling  effect  on  journalistic  activity’198.  A  Media  Freedom  Rapid  Response  (MFRR) 
report  published  following  MFRR’s  recent  mission  to  Italy  highlights  the  extent  to  which 
various  types  of  legal  threats  are  having  a  tangible  adverse  effect  on  investigative  and 
independent journalism in the country199.  

Cases  of  physical  attacks,  death  threats  and  other  forms  of  intimidation  against 
journalists have continued to rise. Since the 2021 Rule of Law Report, 12 alerts concerning 
Italy  were  registered  by  the  Council  of  Europe’s  Platform  to  promote  the  protection  of 
journalism and safety of journalists200. Six of those cases concern court proceedings in civil 
or criminal  cases  brought  against  journalists or media outlets.  The remaining cases  concern 
assault  and  intimidation  of  journalists  covering  COVID-19  pandemic  related  events  and 
stories, cases of physical and sexual assault, death threats and the raiding of the offices of a 
newspaper by unkonown individuals. Despite the repeated requests made by the Italian Press 
Association, the protection of journalistic sources and the framework law on the professional 
secrecy of journalists remain inadequate201. As a result, the MPM 2022, once more rates the 
indicator on journalistic profession, standards and protection as medium risk but has slightly 

193  Audiovisual content rules which all broadcasters must adhere to.  
194  2022 Media Pluralism Monitor, p. 21.  
195  2021 Rule of law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, p. 16.  
196  Official Press Release of the Italian Constitutional Court dated 22 June 2021 published on its website.  
197  Written contribution from NGO Ossigeno per l’Informazione in the context of the country visit.  
198  2022 Media Pluralism Monitor, p. 11. 
199 ‘Who is afraid of journalists?’ Report of the MFRR fact-finding mission to Italy 4-6 April 2022, coordinated 

by OBC Transeuropa.  

200  Council of Europe, Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists, Italy. Italy has 

replied to seven of those alerts.  

201  Contribution  from  the  Italian  National  Press  Federation  for  the  2022  Rule  of  Law  Report.  Concerns  have 
also been voiced by this association with regard to journalistic coverage of crimes due to the application of 
Legislative  Decree  188/2021  which  implements  Directive  (EU)  2016/343  on  the  strengthening  of  certain 
aspects of the presumption of innocence and of  the right to be present at the trial in criminal proceedings. 
Under the Legislative Decree all police contacts with the press have been concentrated in the hands of the 
Chief Prosecutor.  

22 

 
                                                 
to  flag 

increased its risk score within that band202. As in past years, both the MPM 2022 and several 
stakeholders  continue 
journalists'  working  conditions, 
the  deterioration  of 
characterised  by  a  growing  gap  between  employed  journalists  and  freelancers  and  a 
generalised reduction in newsroom staff, as an issue of major concern203. While the Ministry 
of  Interior  continues  to  monitor  the  cases  of  physical  attacks  and  other  threats  against 
journalists  via  the  specialised  Coordination  Centre,  cases  of  intimidation  have  continued  to 
rise204.  The  latest  statistics  made  available  by  the  Coordination  Centre  reveal  that,  in  2021, 
232 acts of intimidation were recorded (a 42% increase over the previous year) of which 11% 
concerned organised  crime and 49% were of a ‘political-social nature’. 44% of all cases of 
intimidation  occur  on  line,  on  social  media  networks  or  by  email205.  The  above-mentioned 
MFRR  report  recognises  the  value  of  the  Coordination  Centre  but  suggests  Italy  should 
consider  additional  measures  under  the  Centre’s  remit  –  such  as  looking  more  closely  at 
threats appearing on social media platforms - given the dramatic scenario on the ground206. A 
series  of  economic  measures  in  the  form  of  tax  credits  introduced  in  2021,  aimed  at 
mitigating  the  impact  of  the  consequences  of  the  COVID-19  pandemic  on  the  media  and 
based on a series of objective criteria, have continued to provide support to the sector.  

IV.  OTHER INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES RELATED TO CHECKS AND BALANCES 

Italy  is  a  unitary  parliamentary  republic  with  an  indirectly  elected  President207.  The 
Parliament is bicameral: it comprises the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate, both having 
the same powers. The right of legislative initiative is vested in the Government, the members 
of  Parliament,  50  000  citizens,  the  National  Council  for  Economics  and  Labour208,  and  the 
Regional Council. The Constitutional Court decides in exclusivity on disputes regarding the 
constitutionality of laws. There is currently no national human rights institution, and several 
regional  ombudspersons  are  responsible  for  safeguarding  the  freedoms  and  rights  of 
persons209.  The  Inter-ministerial  Committee  for  Human  Rights  (CIDU)  is  the  coordinating 
national  institution  interacting  with  civil  society,  academia,  and  all  relevant  stakeholders  to 
ensure reporting and follow-up on human rights issues. 

The Parliament and the Constitutional Court have continued to exercise scrutiny over 
restrictive  measures  taken  in  the  context  of  the  COVID-19  pandemic,  while  the 
emergency  regime  has  recently  ended.  In  2021,  rules  governing  the  emergency  situation 
were introduced primarly by Decree laws with subsequent scrutiny by Parliament, while the 
Decrees of the President of the Council of Ministers were used in a limited manner210. On 22 

202  2022 Media Pluralism Monitor, p. 12. The risk score has increased from 42 to 47%.  
203  Written contribution from Ossigeno per l’informazione, Articolo 19 and the Italian Press Federation in the 

context of the country visit.  

204    The  success  of  the  Coordination  Centre’s  awareness-raising  may  contribute  to  the  increasing  numbers  of 

incidents reported and therefore registered.  

205  Coordination Centre for monitoring, analysis and permanent exchange of information on acts of intimidation 
against journalists. In the first quarter of 2022, cases of intimidation decreased by 30% compared to the same 
period of the previous year.    

206 ‘Who is afraid of journalists?’ Report of the MFRR fact-finding mission to Italy 4-6 April 2022, coordinated 

by OBC Transeuropa, p. 17-19.  

207  The President is elected by Parliament, meeting in joint session, together with 58 regional electors. 
208  The National Council for Economics and Labour is also vested with the right to propose legislation in the 

economic and social field. 

209  For more information, see Ombudsman of Tuscany website, http://www.difensorecivicotoscana.it.  
210  In 2020, 20 Decree of the President of the Council of Ministers were issued as a response to the COVID-19 
pandemic,  compared  to  only  two  Decree  of  the  President  of  the  Council  of  Ministers  issued  in  2021. 

23 

 
                                                 
 
October 2021, the Constitutional Court declared that Decrees of the President of the Council 
of Ministers related to the COVID-19 pandemic comply with the legality principle211. On 1 
April  2022,  the  emergency  regime  ended.  The  emergency  regime  adopted  on  31  January 
2020  was  last  renewed  until  31  March  2022212.  The  discussion  on  the  establishment  of  a 
special bicameral Commission213 to be consulted on any act of the Government related to the 
pandemic  is  still  ongoing  in  the  Senate,  but  became  less  urgent  following  the  adoption  of 
Decree-laws for countering the situation in 2021214. 

On 1 January 2022, Italy had 58 leading judgments of the European Court of Human 
Rights pending implementation215. At that time, Italy’s rate of leading judgments from the 
past 10 years that remained pending was at 58% and the average time that the judgments had 
been  pending  implementation  was  over  5  years  and  10  months216.  The  oldest  leading 
judgment, pending for 25 years, concerns the excessive length of criminal and administrative 
proceedings217.  On  1  July  2022,  the  number  of  leading  judgments  pending  implementation 
has increased to 59218. 

A  National  Human  Rights  Institution  remains  to  be  established.  The  creation  of  a 
National Human Rights Institution (NHRI)219 remains a concern as it continues to be subject 
to  debates220  and  no  relevant  progress  has  been  realised.  Three  draft  laws  aimed  at 
establishing such institution have been unified in one single draft law with a view to creating 
a  National  Commission  for  the  Promotion  and  Protection  of  Human  Rights  and  the  Fight 
against  Discrimination221,  a  NHRI  in  line  with  the  Paris  Principles  and  recommendations 

Moreover,  since  January  2021,  58  decree-laws  have  been  adopted  and  converted  into  law,  including  16 
decree-laws, which have lapsed and have been incorporated in other legislation. - Written contribution from 
Parliament in the context of the country visit. 

211  The  Constitutional  Court  found  that  the  measures  established  by  Decree-laws  introduced  a  sufficiently 
precise  and  defined  legal  framework,  compatible  with  the  principles  set  out  by  the  Constitution.  XIX 
Congress of the Conference of European Constitutional Courts, pp. 20 and 21. Ruling of the Constitutional 
Court No. 198 of 2021 (ECLI:IT:COST:2021:198).  

212  Decree Law No. 221 of 2021 converted into Law No. 11 of 18 February 2022. See also  2021 Rule of Law 

Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, pp. 17-18. 

213  2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, pp.17 and 18.  
214  Written contribution from Parliament in the context of the country visit. 
215  The adoption of necessary execution  measures  for a  judgment by the European  Court of Human  Rights is 
supervised by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. It is the Committee’s practice to group 
cases against a State requiring similar execution measures, particularly general measures, and examine them 
jointly. The first case in the group is designated as the leading case as regards the supervision of the general 
measures and repetitive cases within the group can be closed when it is assessed that all possible individual 
measures needed to provide redress to the applicant have been taken. 

216  All figures are calculated by the European Implementation Network and are based on the number of cases 
that  are  considered  pending  at  the  annual  cut-off  date  of  1  January  2022.  See  the  Contribution  from  the 
European Implementation Network for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 52.. 

217  Judgment  of  the  European  Court  of  Human  Rights  of  2  September  1997,  Abenavoli  v.  Italy,  24487/94, 

pending implementation since 1997. 

218  Data according to the online database of the Council of Europe (HUDOC) 
219  Italy  has  two  institutions  dealing  with  specific  areas  of  human  rights  -  National  Authority  (Garante 
nazionale) for the rights of persons deprived of liberty and the Authority for Children and Adolescents. 

220  Input from Italy for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 52. 
221  Istituzione della Commissione nazionale per la promozione e la protezione dei diritti umani fondamentali e 
per il contrasto alle discriminazioni. Proposte di legge C. 1323 Scagliusi, C. 855 Quartapelle Procopio e C. 
1794  Brescia,  p.  57.  Written  contribution  from  Parliament  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit.  See  also 
Contribution from Civil Liberties Union for Europe on Italy for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 26. 

24 

 
                                                                                                                                                        
from  the  United  Nations222.  The  timetable  for  the  work  of  the  First  Committee  is  being 
drawn-up  in  order  to  examine  the  amendments.  In  November  2021,  the  Government 
reiterated  its  full  support  for  the  establishment  of  this  institution223  and  the  Minister  of 
Foreign Affairs recently indicated the need to expedite this process224.  

The civic space remains narrowed, in particular for civil  society organisations dealing 
with  migrants.  Despite  some  improvements  noted  in  the  2021  Rule  of  Law  Report225,  the 
civic space continues to be assessed as narrowed226. During 2021, Italian Courts discharged 
NGOs that carried out search and rescue operations in the Mediterranean227. These NGOs had 
been  accused  by  authorities  of  facilitating  irregular  migrations  and  irregular  borders 
crossing228.Stakeholders 
intimidation  against  civil  society 
organisations  (CSOs)  dealing  with  migrants’  rights  persist229.  No  developments  have  been 
reported  as  regards  the  complexity  of  the  registration  process  for  NGOs  and  delays  in  the 
implementation of the law harmonising rules on the non-profit sector230. However, the RRP 
provides  for  the  establishment  of  a  permanent  advisory  board  including  CSOs  to  promote 
democratic  participation231.  Additional  funds  have  been  allocated  to  CSOs  through  an 
extraordinary  fund  for  the  support  of  the  third  sector  due  to  the  COVID-19  pandemic  and 
social bonus for organisations providing funds to civil society232. 

forms  of 

reported 

that 

222  Following  its  a  visit  to  Italy  in  October  2021,  the  UN  Working  Group  on  business  and  human  rights  has 
called  on  Italy  to  establish  a  strong,  independent  NHRI  without  further  delay  with  an  explicit  mandate  to 
deal with business-related human rights abuses. Contribution from UN OHCHR on Italy for the 2022 Rule 
of Law Report, p.1. 

223  Ibid, p. 30. 
224  Input from Italy for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 50. 
225 2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, pp. 18-19. 
226  See the rating given by CIVICUS, lastly updated on 31 January 2021. Ratings are on a five-category scale 
defined as: open, narrowed, obstructed, repressed and closed. See also 2021 Rule of Law Report,  Country 
Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, p. 19. 

227  Dismissal by the Court of Agrigento dated 20 December 2021. See also  Franet (2022), Country research  - 
Legal environment and space of civil society organisations in supporting fundamental rights – Italy, p. 4.  
228  Franet (2022), Country research - Legal environment and space of civil society organisations in supporting 

fundamental rights – Italy, p. 4. 

229  Contributions from European Civic Forum and Civil Liberties for Europe for the 2022 Rule of Law Report.  
230  2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy, pp.18-19. 
231  Franet (2022), Country research - Legal environment and space of civil society organisations in supporting 

fundamental rights – Italy.  

232  Franet (2022), Country research - Legal environment and space of civil society organisations in supporting 

fundamental rights – Italy, p. 3. 

25 

 
                                                 
Annex I: List of sources in alphabetical order* 

* The list of contributions received in the context of the consultation for the 2022 Rule of Law report 
can  be  found  at  https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/2022-rule-law-report-targeted-stakeholder-
consultation_en. 

ANSA  (2022),  League  treasurer  gets  8  mts  for  illegal  party  funding,  (14  March  2022), 
https://www.ansa.it/english/news/politics/2022/03/14/league-treasurer-gets-8-mts-for-illegal-party-
funding_5f57f3e6-083e-4ed5-b432-39bbdb98ad6a.html 

Articolo 19 (2022), Written contribution from Articolo 19 in the context of the country visit. 

Centre  for  Media  Pluralism  and  Media  Freedom  (2022),  Media  pluralism  monitor  2022  –  country 
report on Italy.  

CEPEJ (2021), Study on the functioning of the judicial systems in the EU Member States. 

Chamber  of  Deputies,  Act  No.  196-721-1827-A,  Legislative  Proposal  No.  196  of  23  March  2018 
Discipline of the activity of representation of special interests and establishment of the public register 
(196), 
of 
https://www.camera.it/leg18/126?tab=1&leg=18&idDocumento=196&sede=&tipo=  

representatives 

interest 

Chamber of Deputies, Proposal No. n. 1827, Discipline of the activity of institutional relations for the 
interests, 
representation 
http://documenti.camera.it/leg18/pdl/pdf/leg.18.pdl.camera.196_A.18PDL0153920.pdf  

of 

Chamber  of  Deputies,  Proposal  No.  n.  721,  Rules  on  the  transparency  of  relations  between  the 
representatives  of  special  interests  and  members  of  the  Government  and  the  leaders  of  the  state 
administrations; 
http://documenti.camera.it/leg18/pdl/pdf/leg.18.pdl.camera.196_A.18PDL0153920.pdf  

Chamber of Deputies (2022), Stenographic report of the Assembly Session No. 639. 

Civicus, Monitor tracking civic space – Italy https://monitor.civicus.org/country/italy/.  

Civil Liberties Union for Europe (2022), Contribution from Civil Liberties Union for Europe for the 
2022 Rule of Law Report. 

Constitutional Court (2021), Press release, ‘Press defamation: imprisonment only in cases of extreme 
severity’  (‘Diffamazione  a  mezzo  stampa:  carcere  solo  nei  casi  di  eccezionale  gravità’) 
https://www.cortecostituzionale.it/documenti/comunicatistampa/CC_CS_20210622191846.pdf.  

Constitutional Court, judgments of 16 February  2022, Decisions No. 56 to 60 of 16 February 2022, 
ECLI:IT:COST:2022:56 to ECLI:IT:COST:2022:60. 

Constitutional Court, judgment of 27 October 2021, 198/2021, ECLI:IT:COST:2021:198. 

Council  of  Europe:  Committee  of  Ministers  (2010),  Recommendation  CM/Rec(2010)12  of  the 
Committee of Ministers to member states on judges: independence, efficiency and responsibilities. 

Council  of  Europe:  Consultative  Council  of  European  Judges  (2014),  Opinion  of  the  Consultative 
Council of European Judges on the evaluation of judges’ work, the quality of justice and respect for 
judicial independence (CCJE(2014)2). 

Council  of  Europe:  Consultative  Council  of  European  Judges  (2021),  Opinion  of  the  Consultative 
Council  of  European  Judges  on  the  evolution  of  the  Councils  for  the  Judiciary  and  their  role  in 
independent and impartial judicial systems (CCJE(2021)11). 

Council of Europe, Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists  – Italy 
https://fom.coe.int/en/alerte?years=2022&typeData=1&time=1653914309287.  

Council of State (2022), Written contribution from the Council of State in the context of the country 
visit. 

26 

 
Court  of  Auditors  (2022),  Written  contribution  from  the  Court  of  Auditors  in  the  context  of  the 
country visit. 

Court  of  Cassation  (2022),  Written  contribution  from  the  Court  of  Cassation  in  the  context  of  the 
country visit.  

Directive (EU) 2016/343 on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and 
of the right to be present at the trial in criminal proceedings. 

Directive (EU) 2018/1808 amending Directive 2010/13/EU on the coordination of certain provisions 
laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of 
audiovisual  media  services  (Audiovisual  Media  Services  Directive)  in  view  of  changing  market 
realities. 

Directive (EU) 2019/1937 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law. 

Directorate-General  for  Communication  (2019),  Flash  Eurobarometer  482:  businesses’  attitudes 
towards corruption in the EU. 

Directorate-General for Communication (2020), Special Eurobarometer 502: corruption. 

Directorate-General  for  Communication  (2022),  Flash  Eurobarometer  507:  businesses’  attitudes 
towards corruption in the EU. 

Directorate-General for Communication (2022), Special Eurobarometer 523: corruption. 

European  Association  of  Judges  (2022),  Contribution  from  the  European  Association  of  Judges  for 
the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (2022), ‘Who’s afraid of journalists? The MFRR Italy 
Mission Report’ https://www.ecpmf.eu/who-is-afraid-of-journalists-the-mfrr-italy-mission-report/.  

European  Civic  Forum  (2022),  Contribution  from  the  European  Civic  Forum  for  the  2022  Rule  of 
Law Report. 

European Commission (2020), 2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation 
in Italy. 

European Commission (2021), 2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation 
in Italy. 

European Commission (2022), EU Justice Scoreboard. 

European Commission (2022), Country report Italy, SWD(2022) 616 final. 

European Court of Human Rights, judgment of 2 September 1997, Abenavoli v. Italy, 24487/94. 

European Court of Human Rights, judgment of 12 May 1999, Ledonne v Italy, 35742/97. 

European Implementation Network (2022), Contribution from the European Implementation Network 
for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

Franet, Fondazione “Giacomo Brodolini” (2022), Country research - Legal environment and space of 
civil  society  organisations  in  supporting  fundamental  rights  –  Italy,  Vienna,  EU  Agency  for 
https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2022/civic-space-2022-update#country-
Fundamental  Rights, 
related. 

GRECO (2017), Fourth Evaluation Round – Evaluation Report on Italy on corruption prevention in 
respect of members of parliament, judges and prosecutors. 

GRECO (2019), Third Evaluation Round – Second Addendum to the Second Compliance Report on 
Italy on incriminations and transparency of party funding. 

GRECO  (2021),  Fourth  Evaluation  Round  –  Second  Compliance  Report  on  Italy  on  corruption 
prevention in respect of members of parliament, judges and prosecutors. 

27 

 
Guardia  di  Finanza  (2022),  Written  contribution  from  Guardia  di  Finanza  in  the  context  of  the 
country visit. 

High Council for the Judiciary (Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura - CSM) (2021), Decision of 13 
October 2021.  

High Council for the Judiciary (Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura - CSM) (2022), Decision of 23 
February 2022. 

High Council for the Judiciary (Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura - CSM) (2022), Decision of 16 
March 2022. 

High Council for the Judiciary (Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura - CSM) (2021), Memorandum 
of Understanding of 22 December 2021 with the Ministry of Justice and the National School for the 
Judiciary. 

High Council for the Judiciary (Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura - CSM) (2021), Opinion of 21 
April 2021.  

High Council for the Judiciary (Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura - CSM) (2021), Opinion of 29 
July 2021. 

High Council for the Judiciary (Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura - CSM) (2021), Opinion of 23 
March 2022.  

High Council for the Judiciary (Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura - CSM) (2021), Memorandum 
of Understanding of 21 December 2021 with the Ministry of Justice and the National School for the 
Judiciary. 

High  Council  for  the  Judiciary  (Consiglio  Superiore  della  Magistratura  -  CSM)  (2022),  Written 
contribution from the High Council for the Judiciary (Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura - CSM) 
in the context of the country visit. 

High Court of Cassation (2022), 2022 Report of the First President. 

High Court of Cassation (2022), Written contribution from the High Court of Cassation in the context 
of the country visit. 

Italian 
https://www.governo.it/sites/governo.it/files/PNRR.pdf.  

Government 

National 

(2022), 

Recovery 

and 

Resilience 

Plan 

Italian Government (2022), Input from Italy for the 2022 Rule of Law Report.  

Italian  Parliament  (2022),  Written  contribution  from  the  Italian  Parliament  in  the  context  of  the 
country visit. 

Italian Press Federation (2022), Contribution from the Italian Press Federation for the 2022 Rule of 
Law Report. 

Italian Press Federation (2022), Contribution from the Italian Press Federation in the context of the 
country visit. 

L’Espresso (2021), ‘The search engine for private funding to Italian parties’ (‘Il motore di ricerca dei 
italiani’) 
finanziamenti 
https://espresso.repubblica.it/politica/2021/12/03/news/finanziamenti_privati_politica_motore_ricerca
-328551368/. 

privati 

partiti 

ai 

Ministry of Interior (2021), Coordination Centre for monitoring, analysis and permanent exchange of 
information 
journalists 
https://www.interno.gov.it/it/ministero/osservatori-commissioni-e-centri-coordinamento/centro-
coordinamento-sul-fenomeno-atti-intimidatori-nei-confronti-dei-giornalisti.  

intimidation 

against 

acts 

on 

of 

Minister of Interior (2022), Report to the Parliament on activities and results achieved  by the Anti-
Mafia  Investigation  Directorate  in  January-June  2021  (Relazione  del  Ministro  dell’Interno  al 
Parlamento: attivita svolta e risultati conseguiti dalla Direzione Investigativa Antimafia, Gennaio  – 

28 

 
2021) 
Giugno 
content/uploads/2022/03/Relazione_Sem_I_2021.pdf.  

https://direzioneinvestigativaantimafia.interno.gov.it/wp-

Minister 
https://elezioni.interno.gov.it/referendum/scrutini/20220612/scrutiniFI 

Interior 

Results 

(2022), 

of 

of 

the 

2022 

referendum. 

Ministry  of  Interior  (2022),  Written  contribution  from  the  Ministry  of  Interior  in  the  context  of  the 
country visit. 

Ministry of Justice (2020), 2021-2023 Three-year Plan  

Ministry  of  Justice  (2022),  Written  contribution  from  the  Ministry  of  Justice  in  the  context  of  the 
country visit.  

National  Anti-Corruption  Authority  (2022),  Contribution  from  the  National  Anti-Corruption 
Authority for the 2022 Rule of Law Report.  

National  Association  of  Magistrates  (2022),  Written  contribution  from  the  National  Association  of 
Magistrates in the context of the country visit. 

OECD  (2017),  Statement  of the  OECD  Working  Group  on  Bribery  on Italy's implementation  of  the 
Anti-Bribery 
https://www.oecd.org/italy/statement-of-the-oecd-working-group-on-
bribery-on-italy-implementation-of-the-anti-bribery-convention.htm.  

Convention 

OECD  (2021),  Working  Group  on  Bribery:  2020  Enforcement  of  the  Anti-Bribery  Convention 
https://www.oecd.org/daf/anti-bribery/OECD-Anti-Bribery-Convention-Enforcement-Data-2021.pdf.  

Office  of  the  Trial,  Council  Recommendations  of  2013-2020  on  the  efficiency  of  the  Italian  justice 
system. 

Ossigeno  per  l’informazione  (2022),  Written  contribution  from  Ossigeno  per  l’informazione  in  the 
context of the country visit. 

Politico 
party 
https://www.politico.eu/article/italys-matteo-renzi-charged-with-illegal-party-financing/  

‘Italy’s  Matteo  Renzi 

charged  with 

(2022), 

illegal 

financing’ 

Reporters without Borders – Italy https://rsf.org/en/country/italy.  

The  Good  Lobby  (2022),  ‘Lobbying  law  has  been  approved  and  is  welcomed,  although  with 
shortcomings’  (‘Legge  sul  lobbying:  bene  l’approvazione  ma  è  un  compromesso  al  ribasso’) 
https://www.thegoodlobby.it/comunicato-stampa/legge-sul-lobbying-bene-lapprovazione-ma-e-un-
compromesso-al-ribasso/.  

Transparency  International (2017),  Connecting the Dots: Building the Case for Open Data to Fight 
Corruption  https://www.transparency.org/en/publications/connecting-the-dots-building-the-case-for-
open-data-to-fight-corruption#:~:text=In%202015%2C%20the%20G20%20Anti-
Corruption%20Open%20Data%20Principles,for%20using%20open%20data%20to%20strengthen%2
0anti-corruption%20efforts.  

Transparency 
(2020), 
https://images.transparencycdn.org/images/2020_Report-Full_Exporting-Corruption_EN.pdf.  

International 

corruption 

Exporting 

2020 

Transparency International (2020), Debugging democracy: Open data for political integrity in Europe 
https://www.transparency.org/en/publications/debugging-democracy-open-data-for-political-integrity-
in-europe.  

Transparency  International  Italy  (2020),  ‘Money  and  policy:  What  do  the  data  tell  us?’  (‘Soldi  e 
politica: Cosa di dicono I dati?’) https://www.transparency.it/informati/blog/soldi-e-politica-cosa-ci-
dicono-i-dati. 

Transparency  International-Italia,  TheGoodLobby  (2021),  Black  Lobby:  Proposals  on  Financing 
https://www.transparency.it/informati/news/lobby-nera-proposte-su-finanziamento-alla-
Politics, 
politica. 

29 

 
International 
Transparency 
https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2021/index/ita.  

(2022), 

Corruption 

Perceptions 

Index 

2021 

UN OHCHR Regional Office for Europe (2022), Contribution from the UN OHCHR Regional Office 
for Europe for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

30 

 
 
 
Annex II: Country visit to Italy 

The Commission services held virtual meetings in March and April 2022 with: 

  A buon diritto 
  AGCOM (Media Authority) 
  National Association of Magistrates (ANM) 
  Anti-corruption Agency (ANAC) 
  Anti-corruption Unit of the Financial Police 
  Anti-mafia and Anti-terrorism National Directorate (DNAA) 
  Articolo 21 
  CILD 
  Constitutional Court (Corte Costituzionale) 
  Council of State (Consiglio di Stato) 
  Court of Auditors and Prosecutor’s Office at the Court of Auditors 
  High Court of Cassation  
  High Council for the Judiciary 
 
 
 
  Libera 
  Ministry of Interior 
  Ministry of Justice 
  National Press Association and European Union of Journalists  
  Ossigeno per l’informazione 
  Presidency of the Council of Ministers, Department for European Policies 
  Prosecution Service of the High Court of Cassation 
  Rai Radiotelevisione italiana, Relazioni istituzionali 
  The Good Lobby 

In difesa di 
l’Associazione Italiana Donne per lo Sviluppo – AIDOS 
Italian Bar Association (Consiglio Nazionale Forense)  

* The Commission also met the following organisations in a number of horizontal meetings:  

  Amnesty International  
  Article 19  
  Civil Liberties Union for Europe 
  Civil Society Europe  
  European Centre for Press and Media Freedom  
  European Civic Forum 
  European Federation of Journalists  
  European Partnership for Democracy 
  European Youth Forum 
  Free Press Unlimited 
  Human Rights Watch  
 
 
 
  Open Society European Policy Institute (OSEPI) 
  Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa  
  Philea 

ILGA Europe 
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) 
International Press Institute 

31 

 
 
  Reporters Without Borders 
  Transparency International Europe 

32